“You Can’t Go to the Park, You Can’t Go Here, You Can’t Go There”: Exploring Parental Experiences of COVID-19 and Its Impact on Their Children’s Movement Behaviours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 outbreak and related public health guidelines have changed the daily lives of Canadians and restricted opportunities for healthy movement behaviours for children. The purpose of this study was to explore how parents experienced the pandemic-related restrictions and how they impacted their children’s movement behaviours. Methods: Twenty-nine semi-structured one-on-one interviews were conducted (June–July 2020) with parents of children (5–11 years old) in Ontario and British Columbia. Interviews lasted between 24–104 min, were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analyzed. Results: Findings emphasized various individual (e.g., motivation), interpersonal (e.g., parent work schedule), built (e.g., closure of parks) and natural environment (e.g., weather) factors related to children’s movement behaviours. The findings highlighted the loss of structured activities and destinations for children’s physical activity, and restricted opportunities for outdoor play exacerbated by shrinking childhood independent mobility. Conclusion: Families are adapting to many pandemic-related challenges including adhering to public health restrictions, parents juggling multiple roles, conducting work and school from home, as well as exacerbating factors like weather. It will be important to continue to encourage outdoor time, support policies and practice that facilitate independent mobility, and develop centralized resources that help families in the maintenance of healthy movement behaviours.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".