Objectively assessed physical activity, sedentary time and waist circumference among prostate cancer survivors: findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2003-2006)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical activity is well-established on the cancer survivorship research agenda, but prostate cancer survivors remain an understudied population. Additionally, the unique relationships between sedentary time and health outcomes have not yet been considered in this group. We examined the associations of accelerometer-assessed physical activity and sedentary time with waist circumference in 103 prostate cancer survivors from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2003-2004 and 2005-2006. Participants wore an Actigraph accelerometer for 7 days, and activity levels were summarised as moderate-to-vigorous intensity activity (accelerometer counts/minute ≥ 1952), light-intensity activity (counts/minute 100-1951) and sedentary time (counts/minute < 100). Moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity was inversely associated with waist circumference (β=-6.728, 95% CI: -12.267, -1.190, P= 0.020), equating to a top versus bottom quartile difference of 13.7 cm. No discernable relationship existed between light-intensity activity or sedentary time and adiposity. This is the first study to objectively measure the activity levels of prostate cancer survivors. Increasing moderate-to-vigorous activity may assist this population with weight management. More research into the relationships of light-intensity physical activity and sedentary behaviour with health outcomes among prostate cancer survivors is warranted, given the strong relationships seen in the broader population.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".