Associations Between the Child Care Environment and Children’s In-Care Physical Activity and Sedentary Time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Child care centers are important for children's behaviors. AIMS: To examine the cross-sectional associations between child care environmental characteristics and physical activity and sedentary time in children. METHODS: Participants were 124 toddlers and 118 preschoolers from 19 centers in Alberta and Ontario, Canada, in the supporting Healthy physical AcTive CHildcare setting (HATCH) study. In-care physical activity and sedentary time were assessed using Actigraph accelerometers. Child care environments, including structure (e.g., resources) and process (e.g., activities) quality, were measured using three instruments: (1) the Environment and Policy Assessment and Observation and (2) the Children's Physical Environments Rating Scale, and (iii) the Movement Environment Rating Scale. Mixed models were performed to examine the associations between environmental characteristics and children's sedentary time, light physical activity, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. RESULTS: = 0.08; 95% CI [0.02, 0.15]) of the child care environment were associated with log moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in preschoolers. Specifically, structure quality characteristics of the outdoor environment and physical activity time, and process quality characteristics relevant to curriculum and pedagogy, were associated with higher physical activity and lower sedentary time in preschoolers. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The child care structure quality characteristics that are important for children' physical activity and sedentary behavior may vary by age group. Improving the overall process quality, in particular curriculum and pedagogy, of the child care environment, may promote more physical activity in preschoolers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".