What level of physical activity protects against premature cardiovascular death? The Caerphilly study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the optimal intensity of leisure time physical activity (LTPA) to decrease the risk of all cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality in a population sample of middle aged British men. DESIGN: Prospective study of middle aged men with an 11 year follow up. SETTING: A whole population sample of men from Caerphilly, South Wales, UK. SUBJECTS: 1975 men aged 49-64 years without historical or clinical evidence of CHD at baseline examination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All cause, CVD, and CHD mortality. RESULTS: Total (cumulative) LTPA had a graded, significant relation with all cause, CVD, and CHD mortality but no trend with cancer deaths. When different intensities of activity were considered, light and moderate intensity LTPA had inconsistent and non-significant relations with all cause, CVD, or CHD mortality whether adjusted only for age or for other cardiovascular risk factors. In contrast a significant dose-response relation was found for heavy intensity LTPA for all cause, CVD, and CHD mortality fully adjusted for other risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that, in a population of men without evidence of CHD at baseline, only leisure exercise classified as heavy or vigorous was independently associated with reduced risk of premature death from CVD.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".