Physical activity among adults in Canada: an intersectional analysis of immigrant and socioeconomic status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical activity (PA) participation during the COVID-19 pandemic may vary across different population groups. This study examined the associations between immigrant status, socioeconomic status (SES), and outdoor/indoor PA. National-level, cross-sectional data from 4,383 Canadians aged 25 + yrs (51% women) who participated in the Canadian Perspective Survey Series–Impacts of COVID-19 were used. Exposure included immigrant status with potential effect modifiers—educational attainment, employment status, and financial impacts due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcome included outdoor and indoor PA. Covariates included sex, age, household size, presence of a child < 18 yrs, marital status, and changes in unhealthy behaviors (e.g., alcohol, tobacco, junk food, screen time) during the pandemic. About a quarter (24%) of the participants were immigrants who participated in less outdoor PA but more indoor PA than their Canadian-born counterparts (outdoor PA: 42% vs 70%; indoor PA: 68% vs 56%, respectively). Regardless of education, employment, and financial impacts, immigrants to Canada were far less likely to participate in outdoor PA than their Canadian-born counterparts during the COVID-19 pandemic. For indoor PA, immigrants, particularly those unemployed or financially impacted, were more likely to report participating in indoor PA than Canadian-born individuals. Among Canadian-born individuals, post-secondary education and employment status (employed but absent from work) have emerged as key correlates for both outdoor and indoor PA. The findings highlight the importance of understanding the differential SES factors influencing outdoor and indoor PA participation among immigrants and Canadian-born individuals living in Canada. Future research should investigate ways that could equitably promote access to outdoor PA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".