Differential Associations Between Device-Assessed and Parent-Reported Physical Activity With Indicators of Mental Health in Children and Youth With Disabilities
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We examined associations between device-assessed and parent-reported physical activity with mental health indicators among children and youth with disabilities. METHOD: Physical activity and mental health data were collected from a larger national surveillance study of physical activity in children and youth with disabilities in Canada. A total of 122 children and youth with disabilities (mean age = 10 y; 80% boys, 57% with developmental disability) wore a Fitbit for 28 days to measure their daily steps. Parents reported the frequency and duration of their child's leisure-time physical activity during the previous 7 days. Parents also completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (ie, total difficulties score, internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and prosocial behavior) as a measure of mental health symptoms. RESULTS: Significant relationships were observed between parent-reported physical activity and total difficulties as well as internalizing problems but not externalizing problems. Nonsignificant relationships were observed between median daily step counts and mental health indicators. CONCLUSION: Differential relationships between physical activity and mental health indicators may exist among children and youth with disabilities depending on how physical activity is operationalized (ie, steps vs active minutes) and measured (ie, proxy report vs device assessed). Interventionists seeking to improve mental health outcomes among children and youth with disabilities through physical activity promotion should consider these findings when deciding upon methods to assess physical activity behaviors.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it