The Impact of COVID-19 on Women’s Physical Activity Behavior and Mental Well-Being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A global pandemic caused by COVID-19 resulted in restrictions to daily living for Canadians, including social distancing and closure of recreation facilities and provincial parks. METHODS: The objective of this study was to assess whether sex differences exist in physical activity and well-being since COVID-19 and to explore how barriers or facilitators to physical activity may explain these differences. Chi-square tests, independent t-tests and one-way ANOVAs were conducted to evaluate data provided by 1098 Canadians-215 men and 871 women. RESULTS: Women were significantly less physically active than men and reported more barriers and fewer facilitators to physical activity and experienced significantly more generalized anxiety than men. Women who were engaged in less physical activity due to COVID-19 reported significantly lower mental health scores, lower social, emotional and psychological well-being, and significantly higher generalized anxiety, while women who engaged in more physical activity had improved mental health scores. CONCLUSIONS: Given the challenges that women uniquely face due to restrictions, it is imperative to advocate and provide environmental opportunity and support for physical activity to reduce the mental duress women may be experiencing. Specific physical activity programming that is inclusive of lifestyle physical activity and can engage children is encouraged.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".