Health- and skill-related physical fitness profile of Brazilian children and adolescents: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 1994, the Projeto Esporte Brasil (PROESP-Br) battery tests has been used to evaluate health- and skill-related physical fitness among aged 6-17 Brazilian schoolchildren. The aim of this study was to delineate the Brazilian children and youth’s physical fitness profile from a systematic review over studies that used the PROESP-Br proposal. The search was carried at PubMed, ScienceDirect, Lilacs, SciELO and Google Scholar. Original studies published between 1994 and 2017 about physical fitness (health and/or motor performance) with schoolchildren (children and/or adolescents) that used the PROESP-Br battery test were included. A total of 13.582 participants were evaluated to health-related fitness and 276 to skill-related fitness from 18 included studies. The methodological quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale adapted version. The results show that 27-30% of youngsters are at health “risk zone” for Body Mass Index (BMI), 70% for cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), 50% and 65% for flexibility (FLEX) and muscular strength (MST), respectively. The data concerning skill-related fitness were inconsistent. In summary, the results suggest that Brazilian children and adolescents have low cardiovascular health level (BMI/CRF), mainly regarding CRF, and low muscle health level (FLEX/MST). We emphasize that the lack of studies regarding skill-related fitness, make it impossible to describe the profile of the components of this construct.
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 | 0.007 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".