Global prevalence and gender inequalities in at least 60 min of self-reported moderate-to-vigorous physical activity 1 or more days per week: An analysis with 707,616 adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend that adolescents should accumulate an average of 60 min per day of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). However, using only this cut-off could hide important information. For instance, from a population-level point of view, increasing physical activity for those with no or low physical activity could provide more health benefits than increasing physical activity for those with intermediate levels. Also, including a more sensitive cut-point of ≥1 days per week could be an additional strategy for identifying those with low access/opportunities for physical activity practice. Thus, the current study aims to estimate the prevalence of ≥60 min of MVPA ≥1 days per week among adolescents globally, and to describe any relevant gender inequalities. METHODS: We used representative datasets from 146 countries/territories collected between 2003 and 2019. MVPA was self-reported. Participants were grouped into younger (≤14 years old) and older (>14 years old) adolescents. Crude Poisson regression models were used to identify the relative differences in ≥60 min of MVPA ≥1 days per week between boys and girls, and random-effects meta-analysis models were used to identify the pooled estimates. Analyses were stratified by country and region. RESULTS: = 1.09 (95%CI: 1.08‒1.10)). CONCLUSION: Approximately 8 out of 10 adolescents reported accumulating ≥60 min of MVPA ≥1 days per week, with notable differences between regions. Gender differences were observed in several countries, especially among the oldest adolescents. Priorities for physical activity promotion among adolescents should include increasing access/opportunities for physical activity among those who do not achieve ≥60 min of MVPA ≥1 days per week and reducing gender inequalities.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".