Accelerometer Quantification of Physical Activity and Activity Patterns in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis and Population Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the total amount of physical activity (TPA) and time spent in various activity intensities of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and population controls, and to explore factors related to physical activity (PA). METHODS: Subjects were asked to wear a triaxial accelerometer for 7 days and to complete a series of questionnaires. Multivariable regressions were used to assess generic determinants of TPA in patients and controls, and in patients to explore demographic and disease-specific determinants of various PA intensities. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-five patients [51 ± 13 yrs, 60% men, body mass index (BMI) 26.0 ± 4.3 kg/m(2)] and 99 controls (45 ± 12 yrs, 67% men, BMI 25.1 ± 4.3 kg/m(2)) were included. Patients did not differ from controls regarding TPA (589 vs 608 vector count/min, p = 0.98), minutes/day spent in sedentary (524 vs 541, p = 0.17), and light PA (290 vs 290 p = 0.95), but spent fewer minutes/day in moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA; 23 vs 30 min/day, p = 0.006). Perceived functional ability (physical component summary of the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36) and BMI were associated with TPA independent of having AS (p interaction = 0.21 and 0.94, respectively). Additional analyses in patients showed that time spent in MVPA was negatively influenced by BMI, physical function (Bath AS Functional Index), and disease duration. In patients ≥ 52 years old, a higher Bath AS Disease Activity Index was associated with less time spent in sedentary and more time spent in light activities. CONCLUSION: Compared with controls, patients with AS had similar TPA, but may avoid engagement in higher intensities of PA. Lower levels of functional ability and higher BMI were associated with lower TPA in both patients and controls.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".