[Traducción al español] Asociaciones conjuntas entre la actividad física moderada a vigorosa y el tiempo de uso de teléfonos celulares con el rendimiento del control inhibitorio en adolescentes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This cross-sectional study investigated the joint associations of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and smartphone screen time (ST) with inhibitory control performance in 210 Brazilian school adolescents. MVPA level was assessed using the Global School-based Student Health Survey questionnaire, categorized as inactive (<60 min/day) or active (60+ min/day). Weekly ST was measured using participants’ smartphones, categorized as low (<7 h/day) or high (7+ h/day) based on the median. Participants were divided into four groups: inactive + high ST, inactive + low ST, active + high ST, and active + low ST. Inhibitory control performance was evaluated using the Flanker task, measuring reaction time and accuracy in congruent/incongruent stimulus. A generalized multiple gamma model revealed that only the inactive + high ST group showed a higher reaction time in the incongruent phase compared to the active + low ST group (β = 41.1 ms; 95% CI 2.3, 79.9; p = .038). No differences were found in the accuracy (p > .05). In conclusion, physical inactivity combined with high smartphone ST is associated with poorer inhibitory control performance in school 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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.151 | 0.034 |
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".