Stress, physical activity, and screen‐related sedentary behaviour within the first month of the COVID‐19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated how stress, physical activity and sedentary behaviours, of a small sample of Canadians, changed within the first month (i.e. March/April) of the COVID-19 pandemic and the reasons/barriers associated with such changes. Individuals who regularly wear activity trackers were recruited via social media. Participants (N = 121) completed fillable calendars (March/April 2020) with their step counts and answered an online survey. Separate paired-sample t-tests, one-way ANOVAs and bivariate chi-squares were conducted, in addition to qualitative analysis. Daily (p <.001) and work (p =.003) stress increased, physical activity (measured by step count) decreased (p =.0014), and screen-related sedentary behaviour increased (p <.001) as a result of COVID-19. A decrease in physical activity, as a result of the pandemic, was also associated with a larger increase in work stress, compared with those who self-reported their physical activity to have been maintained or increased (p =.005). The most common reasons/barriers to changes in physical activity behaviours were access/equipment, time and motivation. Findings provide initial evidence of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health of some Canadians and highlight the need for continued monitoring of the health of Canadians throughout the pandemic.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".