Trends and Issues of Physical Fitness Theses and Dissertations in the United States and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in English; abstract also in Chinese. This study profiled the trends and issues of physical fitness theses and dissertations in the United States and Canada from 2000 to 2009 years. Research articles, 241 physical fitness theses and dissertations, were collected from ProQuest database. Methodology of this study took content analysis to analyize the trends and issues including the research topics, research types, subjects and physical fitness component. In the wake of going through coding, categorizing, description and interpretation, the research findings were generated. Results showed that the topics of physical fitness theses and dissertations mainly focused on “physiology characteristics”, “psychology characteristics”, “program & training”, and “physical activity”. The research type mainly use descriptive approach and experimental approach to conduct their research. The health-related fitness occupied the lion share of physical fitness theses and dissertations, and the researchers pay more attention on cardiorespiratory fitness. Future researchers can delve into the trends and issues on physical fitness journals and other physical fitness researches. 本研究目的為探討美加地區2000至2009體適能博碩士論文研究趨勢。從ProQuest資料庫共蒐集到241篇體適能博碩士論文。透過內容分析法進行研究主題、研究對象、研究類型、體適能內涵等項目之資料統整與分析。結果顯示：研究主題主要集中於「生理特徵」、「心理特徵」、「計畫與訓練」、「身體活動」等主題。描述類與實驗類的研究類型為主要的研究類型。健康體適能為主要的研究趨勢，並且集中於心肺適能。
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".