MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061962201 · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000000635

Physical Activity and Falls in Older Men

2015· article· en· W2061962201 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara J. Jefferis, Dafna Merom, Claudio Sartini, S. Goya Wannamethee, Sarah Ash, Lucy Lennon, Steve Iliffe, Denise Kendrick, Peter H. Whincup

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilBritish Heart FoundationMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalPhysical activityDemographyIncidence (geometry)Rate ratioPopulationPoison controlGerontologyPhysical therapyInternal medicineMedical emergencyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) has many health benefits but may increase falls risk among older adults. We study how objectively measured habitual daily PA is related to falls by exploring the modifying effect of mobility limitations and the mediating roles of fitness and lower-limb strength. METHODS: One thousand six hundred fifty-five (53%) of 3137 surviving participants (men age 71-91 yr) in an ongoing UK-population-based cohort study wore an ActiGraph GT3x accelerometer over the hip for 1 wk in 2010-2012 to measure PA (exposure) and reported demographic and health status, including mobility limitations. One year later, 825 men reported falls history (outcome). RESULTS: Seven hundred of 825 men had ≥600 min·d of accelerometer wear for ≥3 d. Nineteen percent (n = 128) reported falls 1 yr later. Associations between PA and falls differed by presence of mobility limitations. Among 66% (n = 471) of men without mobility limitations, number of falls increased incrementally (for every 30 min of moderate to vigorous PA [MVPA]: incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-2.03, adjusted for falls risk factors). Step count was not related to number of falls below 9000 steps per day but was related to number of falls ≥9000 steps per day (for every additional 1000 steps per day: IRR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.16-2.18). Among 33% (n = 229) of men with mobility limitations, falls risk declined with increasing activity (for every 1000 steps per day: IRR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70-0.91; for every 30 min of MVPA: IRR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42-0.89; for every additional 30 min of sedentary behavior ≥600 min·d: IRR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.07-1.40). CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to promote MVPA in older men should incorporate falls prevention strategies. Among adults with mobility limitations, trials should investigate whether increasing MVPA levels can reduce falls risk.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations88
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207