Outdoor physical activity, mental health, life satisfaction, happiness and life stress among Canadian adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this article is to examine the association between outdoor physical activity (OPA) and mental health, life satisfaction, happiness and life stress among Canadian adolescents aged 12 to 17 years. METHODS: This cross-sectional and nationally representative study used self-reported data from the 2019 Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth (n = 10 413). The survey categorized OPA into six groups (from 0 to ≥ 14 hours/week). Logistic regression analyses examined the associations between OPA levels and outcomes, with adjustments for relevant covariates. RESULTS: In adjusted models, OPA was not significantly associated with anxiety or depressive symptoms. Compared to adolescents with no OPA, those who engaged in ≥ 14 hours/week had higher odds of positive mental health (odds ratio [OR] = 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-2.38), high life satisfaction (OR = 1.75; 95% CI: 1.24-2.46) and high happiness (OR = 2.36; 95% CI: 1.59-3.50), independent of covariates including indoor physical activity. A positive dose-response relationship was observed between higher levels of OPA and life satisfaction and happiness. CONCLUSION: Independent of indoor physical activity and other covariates, OPA was associated with positive mental health, high life satisfaction and high happiness, with levels of OPA of ≥ 14 hours/week (highest category) showing the strongest associations. Further studies are needed to elucidate the mechanisms linking OPA with higher life satisfaction and happiness.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".