Association between 24‐hour movement guidelines and physical fitness in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical fitness levels in Japanese children are lower than those in the 1980s. Twenty-four hour movement guidelines were recently developed to improve both present and future health of children. This study examined whether meeting the 24 h movement guidelines was associated with physical fitness measures in primary school children. METHODS: Participants were 243 Japanese children (9.4 ± 1.7 years). Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) was evaluated using accelerometry. Sleep duration and screen time were reported. Physical fitness was assessed by grip strength, sit-ups, sitting trunk flexion, and 20 m shuttle run test. Meeting the 24 h movement guidelines was defined as: 9-11 h / night of sleep, ≤2 h/day of screen time, and at least 60 min/day of MVPA. The associations between physical fitness and the recommendations were analyzed using analysis of covariance. RESULTS: Children meeting the MVPA recommendation alone performed better on the 20 m shuttle run and sit-up test compared to those not meeting the recommendation (number of laps: 41 vs 36, P = 0.009 and number of repetitions: 16.3 vs 14.7, P = 0.021). Children meeting the combination of MVPA and sleep recommendation scored significantly higher on the sit-up test compared to those not meeting the recommendations (number of repetitions: 16.5 vs 15.0, P = 0.038) but the effect was similar to that of the MVPA reference only. Meeting all three 24 h movement guidelines was not associated with measures of fitness in this sample. Meeting the MVPA recommendation was associated with greater aerobic fitness and muscle endurance. CONCLUSIONS: In order to enhance children's physical fitness, public health recommendations should primarily target MVPA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".