Physical Activity Among Adults: United States, 2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective—This report presents selected prevalence estimates for overall physical activity among U.S. adults, using data from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Methods—Data for the U.S. civilian noninstitutionalized population were collected using computer-assisted personal interviews (CAPI). This report is based on 32,374 interviews that were completed by a sample of adults aged 18 years and over. Data from questions on usual daily activity were combined with data from questions on leisure-time physical activity to get a more complete picture of the overall physical activity level of U.S. adults. Statistics shown in this report were age adjusted to the 2000 U.S. standard population. Results—About one-fifth of adults (19.0%) engaged in a high level of overall physical activity and about one-quarter of adults (23.5%) engaged in a medium-high level of overall physical activity. Men (21.3%) were more likely than women (16.9%) to engage in a high level of overall physical activity. Men (23.3%) and women (23.8%) were about equally likely to engage in a mediumhigh level of overall physical activity. The rate of engaging in a high or medium-high level of overall physical activity was lower for Hispanic adults and single-race Black or African American adults who were not Hispanic than single-race white adults who were not Hispanic, declined with age, increased with education and income, and was lower for adults living in the South than those living in the Northeast, Midwest, or West. Adults who walked during their usual daily activity (36.6%) were more likely than adults who sat during their usual daily activity (27.7%) to engage in regular leisure-time physical activity. Adults who lifted or carried moderate or heavy loads during their usual daily activities were more likely than adults who did not do any lifting or who lifted light loads to engage in regular leisure-time physicial activity.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".