Development of core recommendations on physical activity for Chinese students aged 7-18 years based on Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To construct core information about physical activities of Chinese students aged 7-18 years, so as to provide a reference for impoving the level of adolescents' physical activities. Methods Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Youth was used as a framework, the preliminary core recommendations on physical activity for Chinese students aged 7-18 years were developed based on qualitative research. Recommendations covered three scales, including physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep. Physical activity included four subscales of frequency, intensity, duration and type, while sedentary behaviour and sleep only included one subscale. Three rounds of consultation were conducted using Delphi method. In the second round of consultation, the results of 2014 Chinese National Surveys on Students Constitution and Health were presented to experts for reference. In the third round of consultation, experts need to rank the importance of seven items of physical fitness under the physical activity type subscale by age group through analytic hierarchy process. Results Totally 25, 25, and 18 experts were consulted in three rounds respectively. The questionnaire response rates in 3 rounds were 100.0%, 100.0%, and 94.4%, respectively. The authority coefficients were 0.92, 0.93, and 0.91. The harmony coefficients were 0.63(χ2=237.10, P Conclusion The development of core recommendations on physical activity for Chinese students aged 7 to 18 might help improve physical activity levels and promote health of children and adolescents.
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 | 0.036 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".