Exploring First-Year University Students’ Barriers and Facilitators to Meeting the Recommendations of the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Adult
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of university students do not meet the recommended amounts of physical activity (PA), sedentary behaviour (SB) and sleep, which can impact academic success. The forthcoming Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Adults (24HMG) are a tool created using a Knowledge Translation (KT) approach, which will provide recommendations for optimal levels of PA, SB, and sleep. In order to address the gap of university students falling short of meeting 24HMG recommendations, the development of an implementation intervention is needed. To inform intervention development, understanding the barriers and facilitators university students face to meeting the recommendations of the 24HMG are necessary. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) can be used to assess barriers and facilitators to intervention implementation across five different levels. The purpose of this study is to examine the multilevel factors that allow and/or restrict first-year university students to meet the PA, SB, and sleep recommendations featured in the 24HMG. This study took place at Queen’s University (QU) and the University of British Columbia (UBC). Focus groups consisting of first-year students were conducted at QU and UBC. Inductive thematic analysis identified three themes and 13 subthemes, which were then deductively mapped onto the CFIR domains. The challenges faced by students directly relate to the individual and the value placed on meeting 24HMG recommendations (i.e., characteristics of individuals involved), as well as indirectly through the social and physical environments (i.e., both at the inner setting and outer setting). When developing an intervention to improve students’ movement behaviours on university campuses, the majority of components should remain consistent across campuses, and some components should be tailored specific to the institution. Findings provide a foundation that will contribute to the development of an optimal and evidence-based implementation intervention aimed to optimize movement behaviours among first- year university students.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".