Relationship between self-efficacy to overcome barriers to moderate and vigorous physical activity and four measures of physical activity among Toronto youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This cross-sectional study examined self-efficacy as a predictor of physical activity (PA) levels among 484 adolescents in Toronto. Participants completed four PA measures (three single-items; frequency and duration of PA listed, done in the past seven days), a 24-item measure of self-efficacy to overcome barriers to PA, and a demographics measure. Factor analysis of the self-efficacy measure yielded five subscales: internal, personal safety, physical environment, social environment, and responsibilities barriers. The subscales had high internal consistency reliability. Regression analyses, when controlling for sex, age, and BMI, indicated that (a) self-efficacy to overcome internal barriers significantly predicted moderate-to-vigorous, vigorous, and moderate PA (9%, 6%, and 8% additional variance explained, respectively) and (b) self-efficacy to overcome social and physical environment barriers significantly predicted MET hours per week of PA (13% additional variance explained). The results can be used to identify areas to target for developing interventions to increase physical activity levels.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".