MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197582253 · doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101535

Identifying risk profiles for excess sedentary behaviour in youth using individual, family and neighbourhood characteristics

2021· article· en· W3197582253 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Tracie A. Barnett, Gisèle Contreras, Adrian E. Ghenadenik, Kristina Zawaly, Andraea Van Hulst, Marie-Eve Mathieu, Mélanie Henderson

Bibliographic record

VenuePreventive Medicine Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityPublic Health Agency of CanadaCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec, Université LavalCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlexander von Humboldt-StiftungHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsNeighbourhood (mathematics)Physical activitySedentary behaviorEnvironmental healthMedicinePsychologyDemographyMathematicsPhysical therapySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= 294) both at 8-10 and 10-12 years of age (Visits 1 and 2, respectively), using data from the QUebec Adipose and Lifestyle InvesTigation in Youth. Excess SB was measured by accelerometry and defined as >50% of total wear time at <100 counts/minutes. Recursive partitioning analyses were performed with candidate individual-, family-, and neighbourhood-level factors assessed at Visit 1, and distinct groups at varying risk of excess SB were identified for both timepoints. From the ages of 8-10 to 10-12 years, the prevalence of excess SB more than doubled (24.5% to 57.1%). At Visit 1, excess SB was greatest (73%) among children simultaneously not meeting physical activity guidelines, reporting >2 h/day of weekday non-academic screen time, living in low-dwelling density neighbourhoods, having poor park access, and living in neighbourhoods with greater disadvantage. At Visit 2, the high-risk group (70%) was described by children simultaneously not meeting physical activity guidelines, reporting >2 h/day of non-academic screen time on weekends, and living in neighbourhoods with low disadvantage. Risk factors related to individual lifestyle behaviours are generally consistent, and neighbourhood factors generally inconsistent, as children age from late childhood to pre-adolescence. Multiple factors from developmental, behavioural and contextual domains increase risk for excess sedentary behaviour; these warrant consideration to devise effective prevention or management strategies.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreventive Medicine ReportsSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207