MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402650789 · doi:10.47197/retos.v60.106813

Evaluación canadiense de alfabetización física-2 (CAPL-2) como herramienta de evaluación objetiva de la alfabetización física en escolares de 8 a 12 años. Scoping review (Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy-2 (CAPL-2) as an Objective Tool for Evaluating Physical Litera-cy in Children Aged 8 to 12 Years: A Scoping Review)

2024· article· es· W4402650789 on OpenAlex
Brayan Esneider Patiño Palma, Armando Vidarte Claros

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRetos · 2024
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysical activityPsychologyArtMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En América y Europa, la mayoría de los niños y adolescentes no alcanzan las recomendaciones de actividad física de la OMS. La alfabetización física, que abarca habilidades y disposición para la actividad física, es fundamental para el desarrollo integral. Este estudio realizó una revisión exploratoria para describir los procesos de validación de la segunda versión del CAPL-2 en escolares de 8 a 12 años. Se identificaron 39 artículos en bases de datos, de los cuales 7 cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. Los estudios mostraron variabilidad en los procesos de validación del CAPL-2, con algunos realizando validaciones completas y otros solo de los cuestionarios. Las muestras variaron de 57 a más de 300 participantes, y solo dos estudios mencionaron la aleatorización. La mayoría de los estudios se realizaron en Europa y Asia, con una notable falta de investigaciones en Latinoamérica y Centroamérica. Aunque los hallazgos respaldan la fiabilidad y validez del CAPL-2, se destaca la necesidad de considerar contextos específicos al seleccionar herramientas de evaluación. La escasez de datos en regiones como Latinoamérica subraya una brecha significativa en la investigación sobre alfabetización física en estos contextos culturales y socioeconómicos. Palabras claves: Alfabetización física, Validación, Inactividad física, Contexto cultural Abstract. In America and Europe, most children and adolescents do not meet the WHO's physical activity recommendations. Physical literacy, which encompasses skills and willingness for physical activity, is crucial for holistic development. This study conducted an exploratory review to describe the validation processes of the second version of CAPL-2 in children aged 8 to 12 years. A literature search in databases identified 39 articles, of which 7 met the inclusion criteria. The reviewed studies showed variability in CAPL-2 validation processes, with some conducting full validations and others only validating the instrument's questionnaires. Sample sizes ranged from 57 to over 300 participants, and only two studies mentioned randomization. Most studies were conducted in Europe and Asia, highlighting a lack of research in Latin America and Central America. While the findings support the reliability and validity of CAPL-2, they underscore the need to consider specific contexts when selecting assessment tools. The scarcity of data in regions such as Latin America reveals a significant gap in research on physical literacy in these cultural and socioeconomic settings. Keywords: Physical literacy, Validation, Physical inactivity, Cultural context

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.404 · 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