Self-reported physical activity versus physical function capacity: alternatives for energy expenditure estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The extent to which self-report activity measured by the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) can substitute performance-based functional capacity measured by the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) remains inconclusive. This study assessed Physical Activity (PA) and Functional Exercise Capacity (FEC); and also determined the relationship between PA and FEC in apparently healthy young adults. A total of 342 (145 males and 197 females) undergraduates of Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ile, Nigeria participated in the study. The IPAQ was used to assess PA, while FEC was assessed using the 6MWT, and expressed in terms of the Six-Minute Walk Distance (6MWD), Six-Minute Walk Work (6MWW), Maximum Oxygen Uptake (VO2max) and Metabolic Equivalent (METS). Anthropometric and cardiovascular parameters were measured following standardized procedures. Data was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The alpha level was set at 0.05. The mean age of the participants was 22.0±2.87 years. The mean IPAQ score of all participants was 1471.4±1086.93. The percentage for low, moderate and high PA was 19% (65), 41.2% (141) and 39.8% (136), respectively. The mean 6MWD, 6MWW, VO2max and METS were 639.47 ±66.6 m, 41805.0 ±8520.6 kg·m, 28.9 ±1.92 mlO2k-1min-1, 4.05 ±0.32 mL/kg, respectively. There were signifi cant positive correlations between PA and each of the 6MWD (r=0.268; p=0.001), 6MWW (r=0.219; p=0.001), VO2max (r=0.268; p=0.001), METS (r=0.268; p=0.001). Measures of exercise capacity were not signifi cantly correlated with the anthropometric variables (p>0.05). Self-report of physical activity in healthy young adults does not adequately substitute the results of the Six-Minute Walk Test. Mbada Ch.E., Osifeso T.A., Johnson O.E., Okonji A.M., Odeyemi E.A. Self-reported physical activity versus physical function capacity: alternatives for energy expenditure estimation. Med Rehabil 2016; 20(4): 4-12. DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0009.5479 null
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".