Clustering of Unhealthy Behaviors in the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clustering of unhealthy behaviors has been reported in previous studies; however the link with all-cause mortality and differences between those with and without chronic disease requires further investigation. OBJECTIVES: To observe the clustering effects of unhealthy diet, fitness, smoking, and excessive alcohol consumption in adults with and without chronic disease and to assess all-cause mortality risk according to the clustering of unhealthy behaviors. METHODS: Participants were 13,621 adults (aged 20-84) from the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study. Four health behaviors were observed (diet, fitness, smoking, and drinking). Baseline characteristics of the study population and bivariate relations between pairs of the health behaviors were evaluated separately for those with and without chronic disease using cross-tabulation and a chi-square test. The odds of partaking in unhealthy behaviors were also calculated. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to assess clustering. Cox regression was used to assess the relationship between the behaviors and mortality. RESULTS: The four health behaviors were related to each other. LCA results suggested that two classes existed. Participants in class 1 had a higher probability of partaking in each of the four unhealthy behaviors than participants in class 2. No differences in health behavior clustering were found between participants with and without chronic disease. Mortality risk increased relative to the number of unhealthy behaviors participants engaged in. CONCLUSION: Unhealthy behaviors cluster together irrespective of chronic disease status. Such findings suggest that multi-behavioral intervention strategies can be similar in those with and without chronic disease.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".