MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965051394 · doi:10.1017/s1368980012003631

A cluster analysis of patterns of objectively measured physical activity in Hong Kong

2012· article· en· W1965051394 on OpenAlexaff
Paul H. Lee, Yingying Yu, Ian McDowell, GM Leung, TH Lam

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Nutrition · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster (spacecraft)StatisticsPsychologyComputer scienceMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The health benefits of exercise are clear. In targeting interventions it would be valuable to know whether characteristic patterns of physical activity (PA) are associated with particular population subgroups. The present study used cluster analysis to identify characteristic hourly PA patterns measured by accelerometer. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. SETTING: Objectively measured PA in Hong Kong adults. SUBJECTS: Four-day accelerometer data were collected during 2009 to 2011 for 1714 participants in Hong Kong (mean age 44?2 years, 45?9% male). RESULTS: Two clusters were identified, one more active than the other. The ‘active cluster’ (n 480) was characterized by a routine PA pattern on weekdays and a more active and varied pattern on weekends; the other, the ‘less active cluster’ (n 1234), by a consistently low PA pattern on both weekdays and weekends with little variation from day to day. Demographic, lifestyle, PA level and health characteristics of the two clusters were compared. They differed in age, sex, smoking, income and level of PA required at work. The odds of having any chronic health conditions was lower for the active group (adjusted OR50?62, 95% CI 0?46, 0?84) but the two groups did not differ in terms of specific chronic health conditions or obesity. CONCLUSIONS: Implications are drawn for targeting exercise promotion programmes at the population level.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.270 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations34
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Health NutritionSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207