Better health indicators of FitSpirit participants meeting 24-h movement guidelines for Canadian children and youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to determine the proportion of girls who meet the recommendations for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), screen time and sleep duration among FitSpirit participants and evaluate the associations of these recommendations with perceived health-related quality of life (QOL), perceived health, physical activity (PA), self-efficacy and body mass index. Cross-sectional analyses of FitSpirit data were performed. All variables were collected through an online questionnaire. The proportion of girls meeting all recommendations was 2.2%, while 72.5% met either one or two and 25.4% met none. A greater percentage of girls with ≥3 years in FitSpirit met MVPA and sleep recommendations combined when compared with fewer years (12.9% vs. 1.7% with 1 year; vs. 10.1% with 2 years; p < 0.05). Meeting the combinations of MVPA and screen time (β = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.40, 1.68), MVPA and sleep (β = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.27, 1.04) and all three combined (β = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.33, 1.71) was the most significant predictors of better perceived QOL. Respecting MVPA recommendations predicted a better perceived health (β = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.18, 0.87) while girls who slept as recommended had a better PA-related self-efficacy (β = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.51, 2.11). Not meeting any recommendation was associated with inferior PA-related self-efficacy (β = -0.32, 95% CI = -3.03, -1.21). Lastly, meeting MVPA and sleep recommendations was significantly associated with lower body mass index z-scores (β = -0.14, 95% CI = -1.16, -0.11). There was a small percentage of girls following all of the recommendations. Furthermore, meeting individual and combined recommendations was associated with better perceived QOL and health, PA self-efficacy as well as healthier body mass index z-score.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".