MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404173875 · doi:10.1080/07448481.2024.2422331

Reallocating time between movement behaviors has implications for post-secondary students’ mental health and wellbeing

2024· article· en· W4404173875 on OpenAlexaffabout
Claire I. Groves, Matthew Kwan, Braden Witham, Guy Faulkner, Denver M. Y. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American College Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychologyMovement (music)Applied psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Examine the theoretical impact of reallocating time between self-reported moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), recreational screen time, and sleep on psychological distress and mental wellbeing among post-secondary students. Participants: 24,742 post-secondary students (Mage=24.3 ± 7.72 SD years; 66.4% women) from Cycle 1 of the Canadian Campus Wellbeing Survey. Methods: Cross-sectional isotemporal substitution modeling. Results: Replacing 20 min of screen time with either sleep or MVPA was associated with lower psychological distress, greater mental wellbeing, lower odds of reporting mild-to-severe psychological distress and low mental wellbeing, except for reallocating screen time to sleep among students who exceed the sleep guideline recommendations. Reallocating time between sleep and MVPA revealed noteworthy patterns: replacing sleep with MVPA was associated with greater mental wellbeing but not lower psychological distress. Conclusions: Findings highlight the potential mental health benefits of replacing screen time with sleep or MVPA as an integrative whole day approach to promote campus wellness.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American College HealthSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207