Policy Evaluation Network (PEN): Protocol for systematic literature review examining the evidence for impact of school policies on physical activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Over 40 million deaths annually are due to noncommunicable diseases, 15 million of these are premature deaths and physical inactivity attributes an estimated 9% to this figure. Global responses have included the sustainable development goals and the global action plan on physical activity. Both point to policy action in physical activity (PA) to address change, yet the impact of policy is unknown. The protocol described outlines a systematic literature review that will be undertaken by the Policy Evaluation Network to address this knowledge gap. Protocol: This review of school PA policies is the first of seven planned reviews. The seven best investments for promotion of population PA identified in the Toronto Charter (whole-of-school programmes, transport policy, urban design policy, primary health care policy, public education policy, community programmes and sport programmes) will form the basis of these reviews. Seven individual scientific literature searches across six electronic databases, using key concepts of policy, PA, evaluation and a distinct concept for each area will be conducted. This will be supplemented with a search of the reference list of included articles. Methodological quality will be assessed and overall effectiveness for each included study will be described according to pre-determined categories. Conclusions: The review will provide policy makers with a list of policy statements and corresponding actions which the evidence has determined impact on PA directly or indirectly. By collating the evidence, and demonstrating the depth of the science base which informs these policy recommendations, this review will provide guidance to policymakers to use evidence-based or evidence-informed policies to achieve the 15% relative reduction in physical inactivity as defined by the ‘Global Action Plan on Physical Activity’. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020156630 (10/07/2020).
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 | 0.167 | 0.305 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.264 | 0.043 |
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".