Young Canadian adults: They may be fit, but are they healthy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Established relationships exist between health-related fitness and Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) in older adults, but this relationship in young adults (18-30 years) is less clear. Current medical practices do not actively use blood lipid testing to screen for CVD in young adults however, non-optimal lipids in young adults have been associated with coronary atherosclerosis later in life. Purpose: The goal was to explore the relationship between health-related fitness and biological CVD risk factors in young male and female Canadian adults. Method: Sixty-seven individuals participated in the study. Fasting levels of HDL-C, LDL-C, TC, Triglycerides, and Hs-CRP were obtained and compared to the following health-related fitness measures; body mass index, waist circumference, Rockport Walk Test, YMCA Modified Sit and Reach Test, right angle push-ups, partial curl-ups, and wall-sit. The Healthy Physical Activity Participation Questionnaire, Par-Q, and Fantastic Lifestyle Checklist questionnaires were used to measure lifestyle behaviours. Results: In men, relationships were found between triglycerides and body mass index (r(27)=.408, p<0.05), waist circumference (r(27)=.541, p<0.01), and the Rockport Walk Test (r(27)= -.500, p<0.01). In women, relationships were found between TC/HDL-C and WC (r(36)=.563, p<0.01), BMI (r(36)=.580, p<0.01), Rockport Walk Test (r(36)=-.496, p<0.01), push-ups (r(37)=-.323, p<0.05), and partial curl-ups (r(37)=-.359, p<0.05). Conclusions: Findings revealed significant relationships between many health-related fitness components and biological CVD risk factors. Although appearing healthy based on the fitness tests and engaged in healthy lifestyle practices based on the questionnaires, there remains a significant amount of biological CVD risk among young Canadian adults that merits further investigation.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".