Parent-Child association in physical activity and sedentary behaviour.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Parents influence the physical activity and sedentary behaviour of their children. This analysis examines associations between parental role modeling and support and children's physical activity and sedentary behaviour. DATA AND METHODS: The sample consists of 1,328 biological parent-child pairs from the first three cycles of the Canadian Health Measures Survey (2007 through 2013). Data on physical activity and sedentary behaviour were collected using a questionnaire and by accelerometer. Pearson correlation and linear regression analyses were completed to examine associations between parents' and children's measured physical activity and sedentary time and reported screen-based activities. Analyses were adjusted for variables indicating parental support and household lifestyle characteristics. RESULTS: Accelerometer-measured physical activity and sedentary time were correlated in all parent-child pairs. Parents' measured moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) was associated with children's MVPA (ß = 0.28, p < 0.001). For every 20-minute increase in a parent's MVPA, the child's MVPA increased by 5 to 10 minutes. Parents' measured sedentary time was associated with that of their daughters on weekends, and with that of their sons during the after-school period. Parents' reported screen time was associated with that of their daughters. INTERPRETATION: This study confirms parents' influence on their children's physical activity. Parental role modeling and support have independent effects on a child's level of physical activity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".