MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119863234 · doi:10.1123/jpah.2020-0629

The First Global Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Guidelines for People Living With Disability

2021· review· en· W3119863234 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Catherine Carty, Hidde P. van der Ploeg, Stuart Biddle, Fiona Bull, Juana Willumsen, Lindsay Lee, Kaloyan Kamenov, Karen Milton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Activity and Health · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDown syndrome and intellectual disability research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of CanadaWorld Health Organization
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Action planMedical model of disabilityPublic healthUnderpinningGerontologyLimitingPhysical activityAction (physics)MedicinePsychologyNursingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization has released the first global public health guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behavior for people living with disability. This paper presents the guidelines, related processes, and evidence, and elaborates upon how the guidelines can support inclusive policy, practice, and research. METHODS: Methods were consistent with the World Health Organization protocols for developing guidelines. Systematic reviews of the evidence on physical activity for health for people living with disability were appraised, along with a consideration of the evidence used to inform the general 2020 World Health Organization guidelines. RESULTS: Evidence supported the development of recommendations for people living with disability, stressing that there are no major risks to engaging in physical activity appropriate to an individual's current activity level, health status, and physical function, and that the health benefits accrued generally outweigh the risks. They also emphasize the benefits of limiting sedentary behavior. CONCLUSIONS: The guidelines mark a positive step forward for disability inclusion, but considerable effort is needed to advance the agenda. This paper highlights key considerations for the implementation of the new recommendations for people living with disability, in line with the human rights agenda underpinning the Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018-2030 and allied policies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.204
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations182
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical Activity and HealthSame topicDown syndrome and intellectual disability researchFrench-language works237,207