MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012171596 · doi:10.1080/02701367.2013.851155

Prediction Equations of Energy Expenditure in Chinese Youth Based on Step Frequency During Walking and Running

2013· article· en· W2012171596 on OpenAlexaff
Bo Sun, Yu Liu, Jing Xian Li, Haipeng Li, Peijie Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Quarterly for Exercise and Sport · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy expenditureMathematicsPopulationRegression analysisStatisticsPsychologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study set out to examine the relationship between step frequency and velocity to develop a step frequency-based equation to predict Chinese youth's energy expenditure (EE) during walking and running. METHOD: A total of 173 boys and girls aged 11 to 18 years old participated in this study. The participants walked and ran on a treadmill at speeds of 3 km/hr, 4 km/hr, 5 km/hr, 6 km/hr, 7 km/hr, and 8 km/hr. EE was measured using indirect calorimetry of open circuit spirometry (Cosmed K4b2 metabolic analyzer). Using multiple regression analysis, the relationship between step frequency and velocity was first examined, and the prediction equation of EE based on step frequency, age, and gender was derived. RESULTS: The hypothesized relationship between step frequency and velocity was confirmed and an accurate (R2 = .78) EE prediction equation was derived: NetEE = - 13.7744 + 1.8004 (step frequency) - 5.5715 (age) - 11.5244 (gender). CONCLUSION: A step frequency-, age-, and gender-based equation was derived to predict the EE of youth during walking and running. The equation can be used to develop a simple device to estimate EE during walking and running in this 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 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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Quarterly for Exercise and SportSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207