The Associations Between Parental-Reported and Device-Based Measured Outdoor Play and Health Indicators of Physical, Cognitive, and Social–Emotional Development in Preschool-Aged Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Examine in preschool-aged children: (1) the associations between parental-reported and device-measured outdoor play (OP) and health indicators of physical, cognitive, and social-emotional development and (2) whether associations were independent of outdoor moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity (MVPA). METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 107 participants. Children's OP was measured via a parental questionnaire and the lux feature of accelerometers. Children's growth, adiposity, and motor skills were assessed as physical development indicators. Visual-spatial working memory, response inhibition, and expressive language were assessed as cognitive development indicators. Sociability, prosocial behavior, internalizing, externalizing, and self-regulation were assessed as social-emotional development indicators. Regression models were conducted that adjusted for relevant covariates. Additional models further adjusted for outdoor MVPA. RESULTS: Parental-reported total OP, OP in summer/fall months, and OP on weekdays were negatively associated (small effect sizes) with response inhibition and working memory. After adjusting for outdoor MVPA, these associations were no longer statistically significant. OP on weekdays was negatively associated with externalizing (B = -0.04; 95% confidence interval, -0.08 to -0.00; P = .03) after adjusting for outdoor MVPA. A similar pattern was observed for device-based measured total OP (B = -0.49; 95% confidence interval, -1.05 to 0.07; P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Future research in preschool-aged children should take into account MVPA and contextual factors when examining the association between OP and health-related indicators.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".