Seasonal Variation And Objective Measures Of Physical Activity In Women Aged 65-75 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical activity is an important component of a healthy lifestyle. Many factors can influence the uptake and adherence of an exercise program including the weather or reduced daylight hours. There are few reports on the seasonal variation of physical activity in older women, and even fewer that have used objective measures to capture physical activity patterns. PURPOSE: To investigate the influence of season on daily moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) minutes in healthy older women. METHODS: The physical activity measures were part of a one-year randomized controlled trial of resistance training for community-dwelling women aged 65-75 years. Participants (N=77) wore a waist-mounted uni-axial accelerometer (GT1M ActiGraph, LLC, Fort Walton Beach, FL) 10 or more hours/day for at least four days over one week at four different times of the year. Days were included if participants had 10 hours of valid wear time. We used the cutpoints established by Freedson and colleagues for MVPA (≥1952 counts). We compared seasonal variation in MVPA over time using repeated measures ANOVA. We also determined adherence to guideline recommendations by calculating the percentage of participants who met 30 minutes of MVPA. RESULTS: Women had a mean age of 69.7 ± 2.8 years and mean BMI of 26.3 ± 4.3. The mean (± SD) number of MVPA minutes for summer was 27.4 ± 23.0; in fall was 23.5 ± 19.2; in winter was 23.5 ± 20.7; and in spring was 26.6 ± 23.4. There was no significant difference between seasons for minutes of MVPA. In summer 42% of participants met activity guidelines and approximately 30% of participants met guidelines during the other seasons. CONCLUSION: In this group of healthy community-dwelling older women, we note there was no significant seasonal variation in objectively measured MVPA over one-year.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".