France’s 2020 Report Card on Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviors in Children and Youth: Results and Progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is an alarming and constant worldwide progression of physical inactivity and sedentary behaviors in children and adolescents. The present paper summarizes findings from France's 2020 Report Card on physical activity for children and youth, comparing its results to its 2 previous editions (2016 and 2018). METHODS: France's 2020 Report Card follows the standardized methodology established by the Active Healthy Kids Global Matrix, grading 10 common physical activity indicators using the best available evidence. The grades were informed by national surveys, peer-reviewed literature, government and nongovernment reports, and online information. RESULTS: The expert panel awarded the following grades: Overall Physical Activity: D; Organized Sport Participation and Physical Activity: C-; Active Play: INC; Active Transportation: C-; Sedentary Behaviors: D-; Family and Peers: D-; Physical Fitness: D; School: B-; Community and the Built Environment: F; Government: C. CONCLUSIONS: This 2020 edition of France's Report Card again highlights the alarming levels of physical activity and sedentary behaviors among French children and adolescents, calling for the development of effective national action. It also draws attention to the particular deleterious effects of the COVID-19 confinement on youth's movement behaviors, which significantly worsened the situation.
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 | 0.014 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
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".