Bibliographic record
Abstract
Walking is the mostly preferred form of exercise for all ages. Brisk walking [5-6 kilometer per hour] for 30-60 minutes is an ideal one for a healthy person. A lot of people in urban Bangladesh do morning walk for cheering good health. This descriptive study was carried out among 208 morning walkers in Rajshahi Metropolitan area, selected purposively and was interviewed with a pre-tested close ended questionnaire for appraisal of their knowledge and practice of morning walking. The mean age of the respondents was 45.78 ± 13.01 years and majority of them (54.33%) had health problems including diabetes (35.58%). Almost all (92.30%) preferred walking in the morning. Majority respondents (64.42%) walked every day in the week and 64.90% spent one hour daily for it. Among the respondents, majority (60.58 %) had knowledge of one hour daily walking and 55.77% knew that daily walking coverage for two kilometers was the ideal. Only 3.63% of the morning walkers were found walked briskly and were scientifically correct in their practice. Most of the respondents with health problems had consulted with physicians but did not get proper guideline for walking. Physicians should advice their patients with detail about walking considering the age and the disease if they think it necessary. Health education program for acceptance of walking with correct information should be initiated and broadcast in mass media for general people.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/kyamcj.v2i2.13264KYAMC Journal Vol.2(2) January 2012, 193-197
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".