Association between walkability and physical activity among children and adolescents: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Housing conditions in a neighborhood may be associated with physical activity among children and adolescents. This study aimed to evaluate the association between walkability and physical activity levels in children and adolescents. We conducted a systematic review, searching for articles published until April 2023 in the following databases: PubMed, SPORTDiscus, LILACS, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane. It included studies that evaluated the association between walkability and physical activity among children and adolescents. The Newcastle Ottawa scale was used to assess the individual quality of the studies. In total, 35 studies were included, 5 longitudinal. The sample size ranged from 143 to 45,392 participants. Most of the studies found a positive association between walkability and physical activity, ~86%. Of the 19 studies that evaluated physical activity using objective methods (most of them accelerometers), 74% found positive results; for subjective methods, the percentage was 94%. Walkability was positively associated with higher levels of physical activity among children and adolescents.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".