MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410311073

Heart disease, family history and physical activity.

2001· article· en· W2410311073 on OpenAlexaffabout
J Chen, W J Millar

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily historyMedicineBody mass indexOdds ratioHeart diseaseLogistic regressionNational Health and Nutrition Examination SurveyDiseasePopulationGerontologyDemographyOddsPhysical therapyInternal medicineEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This article examines the association of family history of heart disease and leisure-time physical activity with incident heart disease. DATA SOURCE: The data are from the 1994/95, 1996/97 and 1998/99 longitudinal household components of Statistics Canada's National Population Health Survey. This study is based on information provided by 9,255 respondents aged 20 or older who reported that, in 1994/95, they were free of diagnosed heart disease and in good health. ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES: Multiple logistic regression was used to estimate the association of family history and physical activity with a new diagnosis of heart disease, while controlling for age, sex, educational attainment, smoking, high blood pressure, diabetes, and body mass index. MAIN RESULTS: When family history and other risk factors were taken into account, people who, in 1994/95, engaged in regular physical activity at a moderate level or beyond had lower odds of receiving a new diagnosis of heart disease than did sedentary individuals. People with a family history of heart disease who regularly participated in at least moderate physical activity had lower odds of developing heart disease than did their sedentary counterparts.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207