Post-secondary students’ adherence to the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Adults: Results from the first deployment of the Canadian Campus Wellbeing Survey (CCWS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: New Canadian 24-Hour movement guidelines for adults recommend several hours of light physical activity each day, 150 minutes/week of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) including muscle strengthening activities at least twice a week, no more than 8 hours of sedentary time and 3 hours of recreational screen time each day, and 7 to 9 hours of sleep each night. This study examines post-secondary student adherence to the guidelines and its associations with sociodemographic factors and mental health. METHODS: We analyzed data from a sample of 20 090 post-secondary students in Canada who participated in the 2019-2020 Canadian Campus Wellbeing Survey (CCWS). Prevalence of meeting guidelines for physical activity, sedentary time, recreational screen time and sleep were examined. We conducted logistic regression to examine associations between meeting movement guidelines and sociodemographic factors and mental health outcomes. RESULTS: Only 9.9% of students (females 10.4%; males 9.2%) were currently achieving four components of the 24-hour movement guidelines. Respondents most commonly adhered to MVPA (61.1%) and sleep (59.7%) guidelines. Adherence to sedentary and screen time guidelines was lower (56.3% and 36.2%, respectively). Sociodemographic factors associated with higher odds of meeting the guidelines included being female, older age, self-identifying as White, and living at high socioeconomic status. Students who reported higher psychological well-being were more likely to meet the guidelines. DISCUSSION: Overall adherence to the new guidelines is low among post-secondary students in Canada. The CCWS provides a mechanism for monitoring the dissemination and implementation of the new Canadian 24-hour movement guidelines for adults.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".