BC COVID-19 Actions and Restrictions on Physical Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: At the start of 2020, a novel corona virus disease (COVID-19), began sweeping across the world. Canada took numerous measures to reduce transmission, and provinces additionally implemented their own strategies. The province of British Columbia (BC) instated several strategies including “lock-down” type procedures resulting in the closure of businesses, schools, community centres, playgrounds, and exercise and recreation sites. Purpose: The purpose of this narrative review and interactive timeline is to provide an overview of the numerous actions and restrictions impacting physical activity in BC. Methods: A search was conducted from the dates of March 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021 on the BC Government News Archives, COVID-19 archive records from the Vancouver Coastal Health authority, and municipality websites for the City of Vancouver and the City of Surrey. Total case numbers of COVID-19 in BC were downloaded from a data set on the BC Centre for Disease Control website. This data was combined to produce an interactive timeline using H5P. Results: From March 2020 to June 2021, there were at least 34 dates on which actions and restrictions were taken in BC that impacted physical activity. Restrictions ranged from closing facilities, such as community centres, ice arenas, gyms, and fitness studios to parks and playgrounds, while actions included the reopening of these facilities and the provision of funding. Conclusion: These restrictions, while meant to control the COVID-19 pandemic and ensure the health and safety of the population, also restricted people’s ability to engage in their usual physical activity.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".