MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029056317 · doi:10.1080/03601270902973540

Application and Reliability of the Retrospective Interview Procedure to Trace Physical Activity Patterns in Master Athletes and Nonactive Older Adults

2009· article· en· W2029056317 on OpenAlex

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

VenueEducational Gerontology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesPsychologyReliability (semiconductor)TRACE (psycholinguistics)GerontologyApplied psychologyClinical psychologyMedical educationMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports the results of two studies. The purpose of the first study was to determine if lifestyle variables and past involvement in physical activity was related to current activity levels in master athletes and sedentary older adults. Retrospective interviews were conducted with 12 master athletes and 12 sedentary older adults. Results demonstrated that education level, spouse participation, smoking, and recent physical activity levels were indicators of current involvement. The second study investigated the reliability of the data collected in the retrospective interviews. Similar to results with younger samples, we confirm that lifestyle variables and physical activity involvement could be accurately recalled for a period of 25 years, making this tool a useful addition for the study of physical activity in older adults.

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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.310 · 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