MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971847041 · doi:10.3109/02703181.2010.532903

Age Differences in Leisure Physical Activity by Adult Wheelchair Users

2010· article· en· W1971847041 on OpenAlex
Grace Warner, Mari Basiletti, Helen Hoenig

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In Geriatrics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsHillsborough HospitalDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWheelchairLeisure timeGerontologyPhysical activityPsychologySample (material)Multivariate analysisMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Despite the need for engagement in occupations to enhance physical health and well-being, individuals with mobility limitations are less likely to participate in leisure-time physical activity. Purpose: This secondary analysis evaluated the correlation of intrinsic and extrinsic contextual factors to leisure-time physical occupations in individuals with mobility limitations. Methods: The study examined a sample of 123 noninstitutionalized wheelchair recipients; the participants were primarily white (62%), male (92%), and aged (mean age = 64.8, SD = 13). Findings: Separate multivariate models were developed for younger and older wheelchair users to explore how intrinsic and extrinsic factors related to hours of leisure-time physical activity. For individuals aged 26–64, education (β = −0.42) and unpaid personal assistance (β = −0.80) were significant in the model, and for individuals ≥ 65, living alone (β = −0.27) was significant. Implications: Unpaid personal assistance has important effects on engagement in leisure-time physical occupations; however, its significance varies across age groups.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.338 · 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