Lifetime trajectory of physical activity according to energy expenditure and joint force
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop and demonstrate the feasibility of a method for estimating lifetime hip and knee cumulative joint force using survey data on physical activity, and to construct and describe lifetime trajectories of energy expenditure and hip and knee joint force. METHODS: Exposure data on lifetime physical activity, including type (occupational, household, and recreation) and dose (frequency, intensity, and duration), were collected from a Canada-wide population study of adults ages ≥45 years. Subjects were ranked in 2 ways: in terms of physical activity-related energy expenditure and in terms of a cumulative peak force index (CPFI) for the hip and knee, which is a measure of lifetime exposure and is a time/joint force product involving years of force and subject bodyweight. A relative joint loading index was calculated as the ratio of joint force (CPFI score) to energy expenditure. RESULTS: A total of 4,269 subjects completed the baseline measurements. Lifetime energy expenditure and hip and knee CPFI scores were higher for occupational and household activity than sport. The mean lifetime energy expenditure from total physical activity in the study sample was 119.1 metabolic equivalent-hours/week. Women had slightly higher total lifetime energy expenditure and CPFI scores than men. The relative joint loading index was highest for male household and sport activity and lowest for female occupational activity. CONCLUSION: Lifetime cumulative hip/knee joint force trajectories were successfully constructed from survey data and followed expected trends. Comparing energy expenditure with joint force revealed variation by age, sex, and activity type, indicating these measures may help distinguish the numerous benefits of physical activity from possible risks.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".