Women with Low Activity are at Increased Risk for Depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assessed if there are sex differences in the relationship between amount of physical activity and depression in primary care outpatients. Participants (N= 111), referred by their family physicians, wore a heart-rate monitor for 24 hr. The two-lead monitor collected the number of beats per minute and minute-averaged horizontal movement data, e.g., from walking or moving about. All participants underwent structured clinical interviewing using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV and completed the Beck Depression Inventory-II and the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised. For the total sample, patients with low activity were more likely to be depressed (p<.006). Adults under the age of 45 (n=85) with low activity were 7.4 times more likely to be depressed than young adults who showed normal activity. However, in adults 45 or older, there was no relationship between activity and depression. In a subsample of women under the age of 55 (n=70), 91% of the low activity group and 39% of the normal activity group were diagnosed with depression (p<.003). Women in the low activity group were 15.7 times more likely to be depressed than women in the normal activity group. In contrast, there was no relationship between activity and depression in men. Additional research is needed to assess whether low activity is a potent predictor of depression in women.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".