System for Observing Play and Leisure Activity in Youth: A Systematic Review of <scp>US</scp> and Canadian Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The System of Observing Play and Leisure Activity in Youth (SOPLAY) has assisted in providing valid and reliable data of youth physical activity and characteristics specific to environmental contexts. The review aimed to examine empirical research that employed the SOPLAY instrument to measure physical activity in leisure-based activity environments in North American countries. METHODS: The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. A systematic search was conducted with an exhaustive process using 10 electronic databases to locate peer-reviewed studies implementing SOPLAY that were published between 2000 and 2021. RESULTS: A total of 60 studies were included in the review. Most studies (n = 35) reported physical activity findings related to contextual characteristics measured using SOPLAY. Interestingly, a few of the studies (n = 8) found the provision of equipment and supervision, particularly adult supervision, significantly increased child physical activity observed. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides information relative to the group-level physical activity observed across multiple contexts (ie, playgrounds, parks, recreation centers) using a validated direct observation instrument.
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 | 0.011 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".