Medication use by middle-aged and older participants of an exercise study: results from the Brain in Motion study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past 50 years, there has been an increase in the utilization of prescribed, over-the-counter (OTC) medications, and natural health products. Although it is known that medication use is common among older persons, accurate data on the patterns of use, including the quantity and type of medications consumed in a generally healthy older population from a Canadian perspective are lacking. In this study, we study the pattern of medication use in a sedentary but otherwise healthy older persons use and determined if there was an association between medication use and aerobic fitness level. All participants enrolled in the Brain in Motion study provided the name, formulation, dosage and frequency of any medications they were consuming at the time of their baseline assessment. Maximal aerobic capacity (VO 2 max) was determined on each participant. Two hundred seventy one participants (mean age 65.9 ± 6.5 years; range 55–92; 54.6% females) were enrolled. Most were taking one or more (1+) prescribed medication ( n = 204, 75.3%), 1+ natural health product ( n = 221, 81.5%) and/or 1+ over-the-counter (OTC) drug ( n = 174, 64.2%). The most commonly used prescribed medications were HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) ( n = 52, 19.2%). The most common natural health product was vitamin D ( n = 201, 74.2%). For OTC drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories ( n = 82, 30.3%) were the most common. Females were more likely than males to take 1+ OTC medications, as well as supplements. Those over 65 years of age were more likely to consume prescription drugs than their counterparts ( p ≤ 0.05). Subjects taking more than two prescribed or OTC medications were less physically fit as determined by their VO 2 max. The average daily Vitamin D intake was 1896.3 IU per participant. Medication use was common in otherwise healthy older individuals. Consumption was higher among females and those older than 65 years. Vitamin D intake was over two-fold higher than the recommended 800 IU/day for older persons, but within the tolerable upper intake of 4,000 IU/day. The appropriateness of the high rate of medication use in this generally healthy population deserves further investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".