Sedentary Behavior, Cadence, and Physical Activity Outcomes after Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study comprehensively examined sedentary behavior and physical activity patterns in people with severe knee osteoarthritis awaiting total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and in individuals after TKA. METHODS: Preoperative (n = 32, mean ± SD = 69.9 ± 5.3 yr) and 1-yr postoperative participants with TKA (n = 38, 67.9 ± 7.3 yr) wore ActiGraph GT3X+ activity monitors for 6.8 ± 0.6 d. Total sedentary time, time in long sedentary bouts (≥30 min), and physical activity outcomes (steps, time in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity [MVPA], cadence) were examined. RESULTS: There were no differences between pre- and postoperative groups for total sedentary time (9.3 ± 1.4 vs 9.2 ± 1.4 h·d, P = 0.62) and number of long sedentary bouts per day (median [interquartile range] = 3.4 [1.9] vs 3.1 [2.0], P = 0.37). Daily steps, peak 30-min cadence, and peak 1-min cadence values were greater in people after TKA compared with those awaiting surgery (5935 [3316] vs 3724 [2338], 55.6 [31.0] vs 35.9 [19.3], and 91.5 ± 20.6 vs 70.0 ± 23.7, respectively, all P < 0.01). There were no differences in lifestyle MVPA between groups. The number of bouts of Freedson MVPA was greater in postoperative participants, but the differences were not substantial (one bout per week). CONCLUSION: Patients report less knee pain and improved function after TKA; however, sedentary behavior does not differ and physical activity is only marginally increased compared with those awaiting surgery. After TKA, daily walking at slow, moderate, and brisk paces and engagement in MVPA do not match levels seen in healthy older adults, which, when combined with high levels of sedentary behavior, leaves patients at increased risk for physical disability and cardiovascular disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".