Association between walkability and physical activity among children and adolescents: a systematic review
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
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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