Changes in traditional chronic disease risk factors over time and their relationship with leisure-time physical activity in people living with spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined whether levels of chronic disease risk factors change over time, and whether leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) can explain any of the variation in those risk factors that change, in a sample of community-dwelling people living with spinal cord injury (SCI) in or near Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. LTPA was measured using the Physical Activity Recall Assessment for People with SCI at baseline (n = 76 adults with chronic (≥1 year) paraplegia or tetraplegia), at 6 months (n = 71) and at 18 months (n = 63). Body mass index, waist circumference at the lowest rib (WC(lowest rib)) and iliac crest (WC(iliac crest)), fat mass, blood pressure, and biochemical data were collected at all 3 time points. Women's BMI was higher at baseline (least square means (LSM) = 26.2 ± SE = 1.56 kg·m(-2), p = 0.0004) and 6 months (25.9 ± 1.6, p = 0.0024) than at 18 months (22.1 ± 1.72). Men's WC(lowest rib) increased from baseline (92.1 ± 1.87 cm) to 18 months (93.6 ± 1.87, p = 0.0253). Women who were active vs. inactive at baseline had a lower BMI at 6 months (23.1 ± 2.91 vs. 29.7 ± 2.52, p = 0.0957) and WC(iliac crest) at 6 months (82.8 ± 6.59 vs. 97.7 ± 5.10, p = 0.0818). Women who were active vs. inactive at 6 months had a lower WC(iliac crest) at 18 months (73.4 ± 14.3 vs. 102.5 ± 6.41, p = 0.0723). There was little change in traditional risk factors over 18 months. Future studies should extend beyond 18 months in a larger sample, and explore traditional vs. novel risk factors and onset of cardiovascular disease and diabetes in the SCI 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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".