MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407206199 · doi:10.1177/15598276251319002

Association Between Nature Attitudes and Physical Activity in Youth From Low-Income Families

2025· article· en· W4407206199 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Zarr, Wing Yi Chan, Bing Han, Erika Estrada, Haoyuan Zhong, Deborah A. Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Lifestyle Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicinePhysical activityDemographyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted a clinical trial on nature prescriptions measuring baseline moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). 433 children between 6-16 years old completed baseline measures (49.2% female, 50.8% male). Participants self-identified as Latino (88.2%), African-American (9.7%), Asian (0.5%), and other or unknown (1.6%). The mean BMI% was 94.9 (SD 6.2), and mean age is 10.4 years (SD 2.7). The mean MVPA was 16.6 minutes, the mean daily accelerometer wear time was 728.8 minutes (SD 126.6), and the average number of days the participant wore the accelerometer for >8 hours (per day) was 6.8 (SD 3.8). Multivariate regression analysis showed that age was not associated with MVPA. However, boys engaged in 38 more minutes of MVPA per week than girls ( P < .0001). Season was associated with MVPA with 5.4 more minutes of MVPA/day in the Fall ( P < .01) and 4.8 more minutes in Spring ( P < .01) as compared to winter and summer. Participant attitude toward nature was significantly associated with MVPA. One unit of positive increase in individual attitude toward nature was associated with 3 additional minutes of MVPA per day (β = 3.1, P < .001), or 21.7 minutes per week.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Lifestyle MedicineSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207