An Evaluation of Student Awareness and Participation in the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines at UBC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2020, the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (CSEP) published the first official 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for adults aged 18-64. These guidelines were the first integrated and comprehensive approach to health, which offered evidence-based recommendations for physical activity, sedentary behavior, and sleep (Ross et al., 2020). Its release aims to address the unhealthy lifestyles of adults, which are especially prevalent amongst young college students and often lead to health implications later in life (Lawrence et al., 2017). However, there has been limited assessment of awareness amongst students. Therefore, more research assessing awareness in students is critical in determining approaches to improve participation in the guidelines. The purpose of our study was to assess student awareness and participation in the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines at UBC Vancouver. Through our assessment, we hoped to offer practical strategies to raise awareness, increase participation, and identify any barriers/facilitators to meeting the recommended movement guidelines, to ultimately improve overall health and well-being for UBC students. Our study assessed 44 undergraduate students at the University of British Columbia Vancouver Campus (UBCV) between the ages of 16 and 25 years of age. Data was collected through a Qualtrics survey that included multiple-choice, Likert-type scale, and short answer-type questions. Analysis of our results through frequency tables and descriptive statistics revealed that participants were least aware of sedentary behaviour guidelines but adhered least to moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Additionally, awareness and adherence was overall lower in students who were not in the School of Kinesiology. The majority of participants agreed that increased awareness of the guidelines would encourage them to change their daily life behaviors, noting that knowledge of the potential health benefits of the recommendations would help encouragement, as well as family and friends. Barriers to engagement in the components of the guidelines included lack of time, studying, lack of motivation, laziness, and recommended that awareness of and adherence to guidelines by students would increase by sharing more information on larger platforms, and having more events and challenges with monetary incentives for participation. Throughout our findings, we were able to recommend three strategies to campus partners in order to address lack of awareness regarding the guidelines. Our first short term recommendation includes focusing awareness of sedentary behavior through investing in supportive infrastructure and increasing posters around campus. Our second recommendation is to partner with and expand the Move U crew to help reach the wider UBC student population and to communicate knowledge of the guidelines during their movement breaks. Our long term recommendation is creation of an online platform that allows users to complete health challenges and quizzes about the guidelines, while being incentivized through discounts and coupons for on campus food. Ultimately, our aim is to provide research on the 24-Hour Movement Guidelines on campus in order to assist in helpful practical recommendations for UBC partners and to highlight the need for increased research in this area. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 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".