MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391480803 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2024.1280893

Determinants promoting and hindering physical activity in primary school children in Germany: a qualitative study with students, teachers and parents

2024· article· en· W4391480803 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Louisa Sell, Berit Brandes, Mirko Brandes, Hajo Zeeb, Heide Busse

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Health, British ColumbiaBundesministerium für Gesundheit
KeywordsFocus groupThematic analysisPsychologyQualitative researchPreferencePhysical activityMedical educationDevelopmental psychologyMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Determinants affecting children's physical activity (PA) at an early age are of particular interest to develop and strengthen strategies for increasing the levels of children's PA. A qualitative study was conducted to investigate the views of primary school-aged children, their teachers and parents regarding barriers and facilitators to engage in PA. Methods: Focus groups were conducted separately with primary school children, parents and teachers in a city in Northern Germany between October 2021 and January 2022. The semi- structured focus groups with children and teachers took part in person within school, whereas the focus groups with parents took place online. Data were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. During analysis, the socio-ecological model was identified as useful to map the determinants mentioned and was consequently applied to organize the data. Results: = 46) of five primary schools in Germany participated in the focus groups. Participants of the three groups identified similar barriers and facilitators of PA in primary school-aged children, ranging across all four layers of the socio-ecological model. The barriers encountered were the preferences of children for sedentary activities (individual characteristics), the preference of parents to control their child's actions (microsystem), a lack of financial resources from parents and long sitting times in class (mesosystem), and barriers related to rainy weather and Covid-19 restrictions (exosystem). Facilitators mentioned were the childrens' natural tendency to be active (individual characteristics), involvement and co-participation of parents or peers in engaging in PA, support provided by teachers and the school (microsystem), living in rural areas, having sufficient facilities and favorable weather conditions (exosystem). Conclusion: A range of determinants promoting and hindering PA, ranging across all layers of the socio-ecological model were identified by children, parents and teachers in this study. These determinants need to be kept in mind when developing effective PA intervention programs for primary school-aged children. Future interventions should go beyond individual characteristics to also acknowledge the influence of childrens' social surrounding, including parents, peers and teachers, and the wider (school) environment.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207