Increasing physical literacy in youth: A two-week Sport for Development program for children aged 6-10
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Regular physical activity significantly improves health outcomes, yet rates of childhood physical activity remain alarmingly low. Physical literacy has been identified as the foundation for quality physical education, suggesting that sport, education, and public health interventions should seek to increase physical literacy to promote physical activity. A two-week day camp program for children aged 6–10 facing barriers to positive development, was developed and delivered by a Sport for Development facility in Toronto, Canada. Utilizing fundamental movement skills (FMS) as a teaching tool and a pre- and post-assessment, the camp aimed to increase physical literacy and promote engagement in physical activity. Results indicate a significant increase in FMS (t (44) = 4.37, p < .001) as well as improved self-perceptions of physical literacy (t (40) = 14.96, p < .001). The largest FMS increases were found in running and balance and the most significant impacts were among low baseline performers.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it