Associations Between Meeting the 24-Hour Movement Guidelines and Cardiometabolic Risk in Young Children
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The authors aimed to examine the association between meeting the integrative movement behavior guidelines (physical activity, screen viewing, and sleep) and cardiometabolic risk (CMR) factors in young children. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, physical activity, screen viewing, and sleep were assessed using parent-reported data. The 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for the Early Years (0-4 y) were defined as 180 minutes of physical activity/day (of which ≥60 min should be moderate-to-vigorous intensity), ≤1 hour of screen viewing/day, and 10 to 13 hours of sleep/night. Waist circumference, glucose, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and systolic blood pressure were measured in a clinical setting by trained staff. A total CMR score and individual CMR factors served as primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: Of the 767 participants (3-4 y), 26.4% met none of the guideline's recommendations, whereas 41.3%, 33.1%, and 10.6% of the sample met 1, 2, or all 3 recommendations, respectively. The number of recommendations met was not associated with the total CMR score or individual CMR factors (P > .05), with the exceptions of high-density lipoprotein (odds ratio = 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.11 to 2.33; P = .01). CONCLUSION: Meeting the 24-Hour Movement Guidelines in early childhood was not associated with overall CMR, but was associated with favorable cholesterol outcomes.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 it