Physical activity and unexpected weight change in Ontario children and youth during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional analysis of the Ontario Parent Survey 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the association between children's parent-reported physical activity levels and weight changes during the COVID-19 pandemic among children and youth in Ontario Canada. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in parents of children 5-17 years living in Ontario from May to July 2021. Parents recalled their child's physical activity and weight change during the year prior to their completion of the survey. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using multinomial logistic regression for the association between physical activity and weight gain or loss, adjusted for child age and gender, parent ethnicity, current housing type, method of school delivery, and financial stability. Overall, 86.8% of children did not obtain 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day and 75.4% of parents were somewhat or very concerned about their child's physical activity levels. For all physical activity exposures (outdoor play, light physical activity, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity), lower physical activity was consistently associated with increased odds of weight gain or loss. For example, the adjusted OR for the association between 0-1 days of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity versus 6-7 days and child weight gain was 5.81 (95% CI 4.47, 7.56). Parent concern about their child's physical activity was also strongly associated with child weight gain (OR 7.29; 95% CI 5.94, 8.94). No differences were observed between boys and girls. This study concludes that a high proportion of children in Ontario had low physical activity levels during the COVID-19 pandemic and that low physical activity was strongly associated with parent reports of both weight gain and loss among children.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".