The Association Between Frequency of Physical Activity and Mortality Risk Across the Adult Age Span
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if the association between frequency of leisure-time physical activity and mortality risk differs across adulthood. METHOD: 9,249 adults from the NHANES III (1988-1994) were categorized as middle-aged (40-64 years), old (65-79 years) or very old (≥80 years), and as inactive (0 bouts of physical activity/week), lightly active (1-2 bouts/week), moderately active (3-4 bouts/week) or very active (5+ bouts/week). RESULTS: In all age categories, lightly, moderately, and very active adults had a lower mortality risk compared to inactive adults (p < .001). In very old adults only, being very active was associated with a lower mortality risk compared to being lightly active (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-0.98; p = .03) and moderately active (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65-0.98; (p = .03). DISCUSSION: The association between physical activity frequency and mortality risk is strongest in very old adults. All adults and particularly very old adults may benefit from participating in physical activity five or more times a week.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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".