The Relationship Between Leisure-Time Physical Activity and Mental Health Conditions in Undergraduate Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between self-reported leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) and self-reported symptoms of mental health conditions on mental health condition questionnaires among undergraduate students. Methods: Forty undergraduates (females: n=17, males: n=23; age=20.25±1.05) from Western University participated in this study. They completed a series of questionnaires which included the ASRS-V1.1, GAD-7, PTSD-ST, and PHQ-9, and were allocated into an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (n=9, 3 females, age: 20.55±1.01), anxiety (n=11, 6 females, age: 20.55±1.22), multiple condition (n=3, 1 females, age: 19.33±0.58), or control group (n=17, 7 females, age: 20±0.87). LTPA was quantified using the Godin-Shephard Leisure-time Physical Activity Questionnaire for a 7-day period and a 6-month period. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients were used to examine the relationship between LTPA and mental health condition scores. Results: There was no statistically significant relationship between the total mental health score and self-reported LTPA scores in the 7-day period (r = -0.178, p = 0.272) or the 6-month period (r = -0.081, p = 0.621). There was no apparent relationship between self-reported LTPA scores and the questionnaire scores of each condition. Conclusion: Our results indicate that self-reported LTPA has no significant relationship with mental health among undergraduate students. Interestingly, LTPA in kinesiology students may be higher than in other undergraduate faculties. More research is required to determine if kinesiology students experience altered motivations for engaging in LTPA.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".