Physical Activity Interventions Among American Indian and Alaska Native Persons: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review was to identify and describe physical activity (PA) interventions that have been implemented with American Indian and Alaska Natives (AIANs) in the U.S. and Canada since 2006. DATA SOURCE: Searches were conducted in 8 databases plus grey literature sources. STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Eligible studies: (a) described an intervention designed to increase PA; (b) targeted AIANs residing in the U.S. or Canada, or if a multiethnic population, contained an AIAN subanalysis; (c) were published in 2006 or later; and (d) reported a PA outcome. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data, with conflicts resolved through discussion. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were synthesized by participant characteristics, intervention strategies, PA outcomes, and impact. RESULTS: We identified 25 eligible studies, most targeting children and youth. Intergenerational, environmental policy, cultural adaptation, and curriculum-based approaches were used. Twenty studies used self-reported PA measures. 80% of studies used an element of cultural adaptation, mostly considering cultural needs in design, not program or outcome evaluation. Sedentary behavior and leisure-time PA were rarely assessed. Significant changes in PA outcomes were achieved post-intervention in 13 studies (52%). CONCLUSION: Future interventions should target AIAN adults to evaluate sedentary behavior and leisure-time PA. Interventions should incorporate psychometrically tested objective measures and prioritize the Native perspective from intervention design through project evaluation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".