Canadian 24-h Movement Guidelines, Life Stress, and Self-Esteem Among Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Adolescence is often considered a period of heightened stress, and healthy active living behaviors may help those experiencing it to better cope with life stressors and increase their self-esteem. The 24-h movement guidelines for children and adolescents recommend ≥60 min per day of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, ≤ 2-h per day of recreational screen time, and 9–11-h of sleep per night for school-aged children or 8–10-h per night for adolescents. The objective of this study was to examine the association of meeting the 24-h movement guidelines with life stress and self-esteem among students in Ontario, Canada. Methods Self-reported data on movement behaviors, life stress and self-esteem were derived from the 2019 cycle of the Ontario Student Drug Use and Health Survey, a cross-sectional and province-wide survey of students in grades 7–12 aged 11 to 20 years ( N = 6,932). Multivariable ordered logistic regression analyses were adjusted for the complex sample design of the survey and for important covariates. Results Overall, meeting all combinations of movement behavior recommendations were associated with lower life stress and better self-esteem compared with meeting none of the recommendations, except meeting the physical activity only or screen time only recommendations that were not associated with lower life stress. Meeting all 3 recommendations was associated with lower life stress (OR: 0.40; 95 CI: 0.30–0.53) and better self-esteem (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.21–0.40). There was a dose-response gradient between the number of recommendations met (3 > 2 > 1) and lower life stress ( p < 0.001) and higher self-esteem ( p < 0.001), with meeting all 3 recommendations being the best combination. Conclusions These findings suggest that meeting the recommendations of the 24-h movement guidelines is associated with lower life stress and better self-esteem among 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".