Recent Patterns of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour Among Pregnant Adults in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate current levels of physical activity and sedentary behaviour among pregnant and non-pregnant adults in Canada. METHODS: We ascertained population-based cross-sectional data from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS), 2015-2019, and the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS), 2007-2019. We included adults who were assigned female at birth and were of reproductive age (aged 18-55 years) living in the provinces. We analyzed activity data from validated questionnaires and accelerometers. RESULTS: We included 53 765 adults from the CCHS and 5321 from the CHMS, weighted to represent 16 million people. Based on accelerometers, both pregnant and non-pregnant adults spent 9.5 hours per day (70% of their time) engaged in sedentary behaviour. Across all survey years, ages, and Canadian regions, pregnant adults, especially those aged under 35 years, spent less time engaged in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) compared with non-pregnant adults. Pregnant adults reported 34.3 minutes (95% CI 30.5-38.2) and objectively accrued 14.9 minutes (95% CI 7.9-21.8) in MVPA per day - 15.1 and 8.9 fewer minutes than non-pregnant adults, respectively. After accounting for self-report bias, only 27.5% (95% CI 24.1-31.0) of the pregnant and 41.1% (95% CI 40.4-41.9) of the non-pregnant adults met the Canadian physical activity guidelines (i.e., ≥150 minutes of MVPA per week). CONCLUSION: Physical activity levels are remarkably low among both pregnant and non-pregnant adults, with few meeting current guidelines. Given the substantial physical and mental health benefits, more support is needed to increase pre-pregnancy and prenatal activity in Canada.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".