Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41501677›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2026

How weak AI promotes exercise in China: evidence from CLDS2018.

Qifei Xia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Qifei XiaSchool of Physical Education, Ankang College, Ankang, China. 17364282646@163.com.

Funding

Shaanxi Provincial Sports Bureau Project in 2025 20250572
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWeak artificial intelligence (AI) technologies have gradually permeated various aspects of daily life, playing a pivotal role in enhancing residents’ health and quality of life. This study explores the theoretical and practical significance of these technologies in promoting participation in physical exercise.

methodsUsing data from the 2018 China Labor-force Dynamics Survey (CLDS), this study employs Probit models to examine the mechanisms by which weak AI technologies facilitate residents’ engagement in physical exercise, with an additional focus on potential moderating effects.

results(1) Weak AI technologies significantly enhance participation in physical exercise. The application of multifunctional intelligent fitness devices provides scientific and comprehensive services, while intelligent and convenient social networking tools meet diverse exercise needs. (2) Personal income and education levels positively moderate the effect of weak AI technologies on physical exercise participation. (3) Males are more inclined to use AI-enabled devices and group interactions for exercise, while middle-aged individuals benefit more from AI-facilitated services. Moreover, increasing numbers of residents in central and western regions rely on AI technologies for scientific guidance in exercise.

conclusionWeak AI technologies, such as intelligent fitness devices and social networking tools, enhance the likelihood of physical exercise participation among Chinese residents. Higher personal income and education levels further amplify this effect. Widespread AI integration in fitness can leverage its openness, interactivity, and personalization, enriching exercise experiences and advancing the development of smart fitness nationwide.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceExerciseHealth PromotionAdultChinaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesArtificial intelligenceMechanismsPhysical exerciseTechnology

Identifiers

PMID41501677
PMCPMC12869972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.