MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393231310 · doi:10.3389/fspor.2024.1346802

Physical literacy, health and interactive aging: a position paper

2024· article· en· W4393231310 on OpenAlexafffund
Rebecca Lloyd, Stephen J. Smith, Derya Sahingil

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Sports and Active Living · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Context (archaeology)LiteracyHealth literacyPopulationPromotion (chess)GerontologyPosition paperAction (physics)PsychologyResource (disambiguation)Health promotionDevelopmental psychologySociologyMedicineHealth carePedagogyPolitical scienceComputer sciencePublic healthGeographyNursingDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Physical literacy (PL), a concept commonly associated with the early years, physical education, and youth sport development, can become a meaningful determinant of health and longevity for the adult and older adult population. A review of 55 recent publications from 2018 to 2023 that encompassed physical literacy conceptual frameworks, assessments, and intervention-based studies was undertaken through an heuristic inspired by the philosophy which gave birth to PL. With particular interest in how PL has evolved in response to the needs of an aging population, this position paper tracks a key shift in focus from the individual to the relational context. It references positive interaction and social participation in recent models as significant features of an across-the-lifespan PL perspective.The concluding position is that fostering joyful inter-action be at the heart of PL promotion, resource development and assessment practices, especially in the case of an aging population.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Sports and Active LivingSame topicInclusion and Disability in Education and SportFrench-language works237,207