MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367853788 · doi:10.3389/fspor.2023.1128565

Program evaluation of a virtual physical activity program for individuals with disabilities

2023· article· en· W4367853788 on OpenAlexafffund
Nikki Matthews, Roxanne Seaman, Emily Bremer

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Sports and Active Living · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPhysical activityPsychologyPopulationLiteracyPandemicHealth literacyMedical educationGerontologyApplied psychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicinePhysical therapyHealth carePedagogyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Regular physical activity is important for positive health outcomes yet, most individuals do not meet physical activity guidelines. Recent studies show that one in five Canadians aged 15 or older have one or more disabilities, yet as a population, individuals with disabilities are 16%-62% less likely to meet physical activity guidelines. The COVID-19 pandemic created additional barriers to physical activity participation as lockdowns prevented in-person programming. In response to the pandemic, the Acadia University Sensory Motor Instructional Leadership Experience (S.M.I.L.E.) Program shifted its programming to a virtual platform; however, there was little research to guide its creation, implementation, or expected outcomes. Thus, this program evaluation explored program feasibility and impact on physical activity and physical literacy. Method: A mixed methods case study approach was used for this project. Virtual S.M.I.L.E. took place over eight weeks in the fall of 2020. Programming consisted of three live Zoom sessions facilitated by trained program leaders, and eight weeks of at-home activity guides for participants to complete on their own time. Demographic data, physical literacy (PLAYself), and physical activity (IPAQ-A) data were collected using caregiver pre-and post-programming surveys. Throughout programming, weekly check-in surveys were sent to reflect on the previous week of programming. After the eight weeks of programming were complete, caregiver and leader interviews were conducted to understand both program implementation and performance perspectives. Results: = 0.03). Caregiver and leader interviews highlighted five main themes following the virtual programming: (a) Virtual impact on programming; (b) Programming impact on social and motor goals; (c) Impact of program design; (d) Impact on physical activity; and (e) Program feasibility for families. Discussion: Results from this program evaluation suggest that physical literacy and physical activity levels were generally maintained throughout programming and caregivers indicated several social and activity benefits. Future work includes program modifications and further evaluation of virtual adapted physical activity programming to improve the physical literacy of individuals with disabilities.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Sports and Active LivingSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207