MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182055545 · doi:10.1123/jpah.7.s3.s314

Objective Measurement of Physical Activity and Diet—New Technologies and Standards: The NIH Genes, Environment and Health Initiative for Technology Development

2010· article· en· W2182055545 on OpenAlexfundno aff
William L. Haskell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Activity and Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaRoyal SocietyMassachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsBest practicePhysical activityProcess (computing)Mobile phonePhoneAccelerometerComputer scienceEngineering managementData scienceEngineeringMedicineTelecommunicationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This symposium addressed the ongoing development of new technologies for the objective measurement of physical activity and diet and efforts to provide best practice guidelines for scientists developing, evaluating and using existing and new technologies for the objective measurement of physical activity. The research projects discussed and the workshop overview presented are components of the Genes, Environment, and Health Initiative (GEI) of the National Institutes of Health. The rationale, plans and progress of the GEI physical activity and diet initiative were presented. Detailed presentations described 2 projects focused on the use of mobile phone based systems designed to collect, process and store data; 1 uses multiple wireless accelerometers to detect body movement and the other uses a camera built into a mobile phone and advanced software to quantify dietary intake. Given the rapid development of new accelerometer-based physical activity measurement devices and analytical approaches, it is important that best practices be used by scientists and practitioners using theses devices. An overview of a “best practices” workshop held in July 2009 was presented. The presentations and discussions during this symposium made evident the progress, potential and challenges of implementing advanced technologies to enhance the measurement of physical activity and diet.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.101
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1010.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0050.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical Activity and HealthSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207