Relationship between objective measures of physical activity and weather: a longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The weather may be a barrier to physical activity but objective assessment of this hypothesis is lacking. Therefore we evaluated the effect of temperature, rain or snow, and wind speed on the daily physical activity of adults. METHODS: This report contains data from 25 males (BMI (mean +/- SD): 28.7 +/- 3.83 kg/m2) and 177 females (BMI: 29.2 +/- 5.92 kg/m2) enrolled in an intervention to increase physical activity. Steps/day of the participants was measured by pedometer. Weather data were obtained from Environment Canada. A total of 8,125 observations were included in a mixed linear model analysis. RESULTS: Significant weather related variables (at the 5% level) impacting steps/day included: seasonal effects related to the interaction between weekday and month; mean temperature, total rainfall, interactions between gender, BMI and total snow, interactions between maximum wind speed and BMI, and the amount of snow on the ground. The estimated magnitudes for the various effects were modest, ranging from approximately 1% to approximately 20%. Thus for an average individual taking approximately 10,000 steps/day, weather-dependent changes in physical activity could reach 2,000 steps/day. CONCLUSION: We conclude that weather had modest effects on physical activity of participants in an intervention to increase their activity. It should be stressed that these effects may be different for less or more motivated people. With this in mind, we suggest that the effect of weather on physical activity in the general population needs to be objectively assessed to better understand the barrier it poses, especially as it relates to outdoor recreation or work activities.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
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 | 0.001 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".