MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3176265386 · doi:10.82308/41938

Mentors in motion : a physical activity intervention for obese adolescents

2005· article· en· W3176265386 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carrie. Markin

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Physical activityMotion (physics)PsychologyMedicinePhysical therapyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Childhood overweight and obesity has become a significant health concern worldwide. Obese youth are now being diagnosed with health complications and chronic diseases previously observed only among older adults. In order to improve their health and decrease their risk of premature mortality, secondary prevention is essential. To help guide development of an effective intervention program for obese youth referred to specialized clinical care, a chart review was conducted on adolescents seeking physician treatment for obesity. Data indicate that this patient population suffers from obesity-related health complications, faces social issues and exhibits lifestyle practices predisposing them to weight gain. Given that physical inactivity is one major risk factor for obesity in this population, a logic model and training module have been developed for a physical activity intervention program, with nutrition interventions to soon be incorporated. This program, called Mentors in Motion, provides mentoring to obese youth as a means of enabling positive changes in physical activity behaviors, mental well-being and overall health. A pilot study research protocol was also developed as part of the thesis activity to test the effectiveness of Mentors in Motion and to determine further program needs and enhancements. The pilot study has been funded by the Canadian Institutes for Health Research and is underway.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet→French-language works237,207→