Associations between children’s physical literacy and well-being: is physical activity a mediator?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Physical literacy (PL) is a multi-dimensional concept that provides a holistic understanding of movement and physical activity. PL contains an affective, a physical, and a cognitive domain, which together lay the foundation for the individual’s capacity and the tendency for participating in physical activities currently and throughout life. PL is increasingly regarded as a ‘cause of the causes’ to health promotion. Cross-sectional studies have shown associations between children’s PL, physical activity behaviours, and well-being. This study aims to examine the associations between Danish children’s PL and their physical and psychosocial well-being and whether the associations are mediated by moderate- to vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA). Methods Cross-sectional data from Danish schoolchildren aged 7–13 years were collected in Jan-Dec 2020 in the Danish Assessment of Physical Literacy (DAPL) project. PL was assessed with the DAPL which measures the affective, cognitive, and physical domains of PL. MVPA (min/day) was measured with accelerometers (Axivity), psychosocial well-being was measured with The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, and physical well-being was measured with the KIDSCREEN questionnaire. Structural equation models were constructed with PL and MVPA as predictors of physical well-being and four aspects of psychosocial well-being. Results A positive moderate association between PL and physical well-being, partly mediated by MVPA was observed. PL was positively associated with the positive aspects of psychosocial well-being and negatively associated with the negative aspects (behaviour problems). None of the associations between PL and aspects of psychosocial well-being were mediated by MVPA. Conclusions The study contributes to evidence on the link between PL, physical activity, and health outcomes. The study found beneficial relations between PL and physical and psychosocial well-being.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".