Effects of Parenting Styles and Family Contributors on Physical Activity Behaviors in Arab Children Ages 6-10 Years Old Living in the US
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of parenting styles and family contributors on physical\n\nactivity behaviors in Arab children living in the US. This mixed-method study included the Caregiver's Feeding Style\n\nQuestionnaire (CFSQ), Family Nutrition Physical Activity (FNPA) survey, and five focus group discussions (FGD), guided\n\nby the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT). Twenty-three Arab mothers of 37 children aged 6-10 years old participated in this\n\nstudy. Seventeen mothers were overweight or obese, and six children were overweight or obese. Although all Arab\n\nmothers self-assessed that they were authoritative, only seven mothers were categorized as having an authoritative\n\nfeeding style based on their CFSQ scores. The FNPA overall mean was 3.15, indicating less obesogenic family\n\nenvironments and behaviors. Across FGDs, common physical activity barriers included lack of time, the child being\n\ndistracted by technology, and lack of a mother's interest in a child's physical activity due to culture and fear. Positive\n\napproaches included considering the child's interest in sports and involvement in physical activity with the child. Negative\n\nattitudes included pushing the child to do sports and the mother's lack of interest in physical activity. In correlation\n\nanalyses, the mother's BMI was significantly correlated with the child's BMI z-scores (r = 0.325, p = 0.005). No significant\n\nassociations were found between reported feeding styles (CFSQ), obesogenic family environments (FNPA), and child's\n\nBMI z-scores. This study can guide future efforts in developing effective education programs, including physical activity\n\nbehaviors for Arab families.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".