24-h Movement Guidelines and Substance Use among Adolescents: A School-Based Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children and youth are recommended to achieve at least 60 min/day of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, no more than 2 h/day of recreational screen time, and a sleep duration of 9-11 h/night for 11-13-year-olds or 8-10 h/night for 14-17-year-olds. Meeting the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations have previously been associated with substance use among adolescents. However, previous research has mainly examined these factors individually rather than looking at how these indicators could concurrently relate to substance use in this age group. Therefore, this study examined the associations between meeting the 24-h movement guidelines for screen time, sleep duration, and physical activity (independent variables) with substance use outcomes including alcohol consumption, cannabis use, and cigarette smoking (dependent variables) among adolescents. Self-reported data from a cross-sectional and representative sample of 10,236 students (mean age = 15.1 years) in Ontario, Canada were analyzed. Logistic regression models stratified by gender were adjusted for potential confounders. Combinations of 24-h movement guidelines was differentially associated with substance use in boys and girls. Overall, findings showed that meeting 24-h movement guidelines is associated with lower odds of alcohol consumption, cannabis use, and cigarette smoking differentially with type of recommendation met and gender. Given that the associations between 24-h movement guidelines and substance use differ between boys and girls, future efforts should take this into consideration.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".