MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6904634041 · doi:10.14288/hfjc.v14i3.688

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on active transportation among Canadian children: results from two national surveys

2021· article· en· W6904634041 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDescriptive statisticsPandemicPublic healthSurvey data collectionSurvey researchDistancingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Physical activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Children’s active transportation (AT) and independent mobility (IM) are associated with higher physical activity. COVID-19 restrictions have drastically reduced opportunities for physical activity, but their effects on AT and IM remain unknown. Purpose: Using two national surveys of parents across Canada conducted by separate survey firms in October and December 2020, we examined changes in AT and IM since the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed potential disparities in changes by gender, household income, and disability status. Methods: Survey 1 included 1,568 parents of 5- to 17-year-olds and Survey 2 included 2,291 parents of 7- to 12-year-olds. We assessed changes associated with COVID-19 retrospectively on 5-point scales ranging from a lot less to a lot more. Changes in IM were only assessed in survey 2. We summarized changes in AT and IM with descriptive statistics and examined disparities with linear regression models. Results: In surveys 1 and 2 respectively, 33.4 and 37.5% of parents reported a decline in AT, 48.9 and 48.4% reported no change, and 16.8 and 14.0% reported an increase. 32.8% of parents reported a decline in IM, 56.5% reported no change and 10.7% reported an increase. In both surveys, decreases in AT were significantly larger among children from households earning CAD$ 20,000-79,999 versus >$100,000 with no disparities related to gender or disabilities (p>0.05). We obtained similar results for IM in survey 2. Conclusions: These findings emphasize the need for public health authorities and policymakers to promote AT and IM as activities that can comply with physical distancing requirements. Funding: Study 1 was funded by Dalhousie University, the Province of Nova Scotia, and ParticipACTION. Study 2 was funded by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada (grant # G-19-0026216).

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)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Collections→Same topicUrban Transport and Accessibility→French-language works237,207→