Physical inactivity and television-viewing time among Aboriginal adults with asthma: a cross-sectional analysis of the Aboriginal Peoples Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this analysis was to (1) determine the association between asthma and physical activity levels or sedentary time among Aboriginal adults, and (2) understand the influence of physical inactivity and sedentary time on health care use among Aboriginal adults with asthma. METHODS: We analyzed 20 953 adults from the 2006 Aboriginal Peoples Survey. Those with self-reported physician-diagnosed asthma and a current prescription for asthma medication were considered to have current asthma. Insufficient physical activity was defined as < 3 hours/week of moderate to vigorous physical activity; high television screen time was defined as > 10 hours/week. Health care use was assessed using the number of health professional visits and overnight hospital stays. RESULTS: Aboriginal adults with asthma were more likely to report high television-viewing time (OR = 1.16; CI: 1.11-1.22) and insufficient physical activity (OR = 1.15; CI: 1.10-1.20) than those without asthma. Those with asthma who reported high television-viewing time reported more health professional consults in the past 12 months (OR = 2.59; CI: 2.34-2.87), more overnight stays in hospital in the past year (OR = 1.95; CI: 1.82-2.08) and more overnight stays in the hospital in the past 5 years (OR = 1.13; CI: 1.07-1.18); results were less consistent for physical activity and health care use. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that Aboriginal adults with asthma are less active than their peers without asthma and that such a lifestyle may be associated with higher health care use. These findings have implications for physical activity promotion and sedentary behaviour strategies targeting Aboriginal adults with asthma.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".