MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100295033 · doi:10.1136/bjsm.2009.057349

Limiting our daily sitting/lying to just 23.5 hours: too ambitious?

2009· article· en· W2100295033 on OpenAlexaff
Khan Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare cost, quality, practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimitingSittingLyingSelf limitingMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationEngineeringPathologyDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If we apply Bono's battle cry ''There has been a lot of talk, maybe too much talk''to the subject of physical inactivity, we can now proclaim it's time for action. The January and February BJSM issues bring together global authorities and focus on practical steps. Medical clinicians will be interested in the analysis by Erica Frank and colleagues (see page 124) of the activity levels of medical students and their propensity to prescribe physical activity (or not!). 2 Is it time to add a physical activity question to the medical student selection process? Should the Medical College Admission Test ask for a shuttle run/beep test score?

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.405
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.109 · 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.

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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicHealthcare cost, quality, practicesFrench-language works237,207