MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4281876472 · doi:10.47482/acmr.2022.50

Physical activity level of medical students: Is there a family effect

2022· article· en· W4281876472 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Asiye Uğraş Dikmen, Mustafa Altunsoy, Ali Kadir KOÇ, Eda KOÇ, Seçil Özkan

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Current Medical Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical activityIntervention (counseling)Logistic regressionQuarter (Canadian coin)Public healthHabitFamily medicineMedicineMedical schoolFamily incomeSedentary lifestyleGerontologyPsychologyMedical educationNursingPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Sedentary lifestyle is common in various age groups all over the world and it is an important public health issue because of its adverse effects on health. Taking actions against inactivity among medical students is important because they will become role models for their patients as future doctors. In this research, physical activity (PA) frequency and factors affecting participation in PA among medical students were studied. Methods: Six hundred sixty-eight medical students from Gazi University Medical Faculty took part in the study. The students answered sociodemographic questions in addition to completing the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). Results: One-quarter (24.9%) of the participants did no physical activity. Logistic regression indicated that being female (OR: 1.7), father’s inactivity (OR: 2.2), and family income less than 4500 TL (OR: 1.5) were significant factors in not doing PA among the medical students. Conclusions: As medical students will play a critical role in improving public health as future doctors, intervention programs should be encouraged in order to increase the PA level of medical students to create a healthy lifestyle habit.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Current Medical Research→Same topicHealth and Well-being Studies→French-language works237,207→