BMI-Referenced Cut Points for Pedometer-Determined Steps per Day in Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to establish preliminary criterion-referenced cut points for adult pedometer-determined physical activity (PA) related to weight status defined by body mass index (BMI). METHODS: Researchers contributed directly measured BMI and pedometer data that had been collected (1) using a Yamax-manufactured pedometer, (2) for a minimum of 3 days, (3) on ostensibly healthy adults. The contrasting groups method was used to identify age- and gender-specific cut points for steps/d related to BMI cut points for normal weight and overweight/obesity (defined as BMI <25 and >or=25 kg/m2, respectively). RESULTS: Data included 3127 individuals age 18 to 94 years (976 men, age = 46.8 +/- 15.4 years, BMI = 27.3 +/- 4.9; 2151 women, age = 47.4 +/- 14.9 years, BMI = 27.6 +/- 6.4; all gender differences NS). Best estimated cut points for normal versus overweight/obesity ranged from 11,000 to 12,000 steps/d for men and 8000 to 12,000 steps/d for women (consistently higher for younger age groups). CONCLUSIONS: These steps/d cut points can be used to identify individuals at risk, or the proportion of adults achieving or falling short of set cut points can be reported and compared between populations. Cut points can also be used to set intervention goals, and they can be referred to when evaluating program impact, as well as environmental and policy changes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".