MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7069055772

Fit kids?

2016· article· en· W7069055772 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUND Scholarly Commons (University of North Dakota) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)KinesiologyPopulationAerobic exercisePARRYDance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Team, co-led by UND kinesiologist Grant Tomkinson, gives American children low marks on global fitness-level report card \nAn international research team co-led from the University of North Dakota and the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) studied the aerobic fitness levels of children and youth across 50 countries. The results were just published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine.\n“If all the kids in the world were to line up for a race, the average American child would finish at the foot of the field,” said Grant Tomkinson, associate professor of kinesiology in the UND College of Education & Human Development and senior author of the study. “Canada, on the other hand, fared moderately well placing just above middle of the pack. This study is the largest of its kind so it’s exciting to have this evidence at hand.”\n“Kids who are aerobically fit tend to be healthy; and kids who are healthy are apt to be healthy adults. So studying aerobic fitness in the early years is very insightful to overall population health,” said Justin Lang, the report’s lead author. He’s at CHEO and a Ph.D. student at the University of Ottawa. “It’s important to know how kids in Canada or America fare on the world stage, for example, because we can always learn from other countries with fitter kids.”\nThe study involved analyzing 20-meter shuttle data, also called the beep test, from 1.1 million kids aged 9 to 17 years old from 50 countries. The beep test is the most popular field based test of aerobic fitness levels of children and youth. It is also standardized and commonly used around the world.\nAnother key finding of this study is that income inequality – the gap between rich and poor as measured by the Gini Index – is strongly correlated with aerobic fitness. Children and youth from countries with a small gap between rich and poor appear to have better fitness.\nStudy collaborators include co-authors from University of Montreal and University of South Australia.\nRanking highlights: Top 5 fittest countries: Tanzania, Iceland, Estonia, Norway, Japan Canada placed 19 out of 50 America placed 47 out of 50

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.261 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUND Scholarly Commons (University of North Dakota)Same topicMaternal and Neonatal HealthcareFrench-language works237,207