Prediction of physical activity and physical work capacity (PWC150) in young adulthood from childhood and adolescence with consideration of parental measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 12-year prediction of physical activity level and submaximal aerobic fitness observed during young adulthood was quantified from childhood and parental measures. The sample consisted of 153 children and adolescents of the Quebec Family Study who were evaluated at baseline and reassessed 12 years later, as young adults. Physical work capacity at a heart rate of 150 beats x min(-1) (PWC150) was measured using cycle ergometry. A 3-day activity record was used to estimate daily energy expenditure (DEE), inactive time (IA), and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous activity (MVPA). Spearman partial inter-age correlations, controlling for length of follow-up and age at baseline, indicated better tracking for PWC150 (0.24 and 0.46, males and females, respectively) than for indicators of physical activity (0.07 < or = r < or = 0.25, males; 0.06 < or = r < or = 0.22, females). Multiple regression analyses indicated that parental measurements of activity and PWC150 did not add any predictive value, with the exception of paternal DEE, which accounted for 8% of the variance in males. There is moderately high stability of submaximal work capacity and lower tracking of physical activity from childhood and adolescence into young adulthood.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".