MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416810990 · doi:10.1111/cch.70186

Building Your Best Day: Disseminating the Canadian 24‐Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Youth via an Interactive Website

2025· article· en· W4416810990 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Madelaine Gierc, Alexandra J. Walters, Emily M. Tennant, Mark S. Tremblay, Guy Faulkner, Amy E. Latimer‐Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care Health and Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsDisseminationMovement (music)Best practiceInformation DisseminationMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Youth ('Guidelines') were the world's first public health guidelines to integrate recommendations for physical activity, screen time/sedentary behaviour, and sleep. Build Your Best Day! (BYBD) is an interactive website developed as part of the Guidelines' knowledge translation strategy. Guided by Diffusion of Innovations Theory, the current study examined whether interacting with BYBD alters parents' and youths' perceptions of the Guidelines and increases their intentions for adoption. METHODS: = 12 years, SD = 1; 53% male) participated in a mixed-methods, semi-structured interview. Research followed a single session pre-post design, with participants interviewed before and after interacting with BYBD. Items focused on perceptions of the Guidelines generally and on BYBD specifically. A concurrent think-aloud method was utilized to explore the process of visiting BYBD. T-tests and Cohen's effect sizes were used to examine pre-post changes and differences between parents and youth. Qualitative data were examined via content analysis. RESULTS: Both youth and parents identified the Guidelines as a beneficial public health resource. Despite favourable intention ratings (parents: M = 5.6/7, SD = 1.1; youth: M = 6.4/7, SD = 1.1), participants discussed that they would be unlikely to adhere to the Guidelines on a regular basis with the primary barrier to adoption being a perceived lack of time. Parents' and youths' Guidelines ratings showed favourable changes following BYBD. For instance, youth reported that BYBD improved their understanding of the Guidelines (pre: M = 5.5/7, SD = 1.1; post: M = 6.4/7, SD = 0.9, d = 0.91, p < 0.007). Likewise, parents reported a higher perceived advantage post-BYBD (M = 6.3/7, SD = 0.7) relative to pre-BYBD (M = 5.9/7, SD = 0.9; d = 0.45, p < 0.007). Parents were sceptical of BYBD's effectiveness and attributed improved ratings to increased familiarity with the Guidelines rather than the website. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the Guidelines are well-received by parents and youth and that BYBD may be an effective tool for improving youths' understanding. Future research may benefit from examining strategies to increase individuals' confidence in their ability to achieve the Guidelines.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Care Health and DevelopmentSame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207