24-hr movement guideline adherence among emerging adults with chronic health conditions and/or disabilities attending post-secondary education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian 24-hour movement guidelines specify evidence-based recommendations for varying age groups regarding the amounts of physical activity, sedentary time, and sleep that should be acquired over the course of a full day. Adherence to these guidelines may be of particular importance for the mental health of emerging adults (defined as ages 18-29 years old) attending post-secondary institutions given that this period is marked by a sharp rise in students’ psychological distress and a decline in their overall wellbeing. These challenges may be further exacerbated for students with chronic health conditions and disabilities. In this study, we will use cross-sectional data from the Canadian Campus Wellbeing Survey to: 1) characterize adherence to the 24-hour movement guidelines among emerging adults with chronic health conditions and disabilities attending post-secondary institutions in Canada compared to their "healthy" peers, 2) determine the influence of multimorbidity on guideline adherence, and 3) examine associations between guideline adherence and indicators of mental health. Together, these findings will provide initial insight into whether emerging adults with chronic health conditions and disabilities meet the 24-hour movement guidelines at similar rates to their healthy and non-disabled peers and ultimately inform whether tailored campus-driven interventions are warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".