Sedentary behaviour consensus statement for older men and women: Development and results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sedentary behaviour has been established as an independent predictor of health and quality of life among older adults. A large proportion of older adults are engaging in 8 or more hours of sedentary time per day. While a significant amount of work has been conducted by international experts to better understand the determinants of sedentary behaviour among older adults, little has been done to understand 1) the range of health consequences and the dose of sedentary time associated with these consequences 2) the effectiveness or potential of sedentary time reduction interventions, and finally, 3) the validity and reliability of existing self-reported measures among older adults. This consensus statement was created using three steps: a systematic review of the literature, a two-step Delphi consensus process, and an in-person meeting of experts. The purpose of the consensus statement was to understand the state of the current literature in each of the aforementioned areas and to determine research priorities. Another important purpose was to create evidence-based recommendations for public health use. A total of 2900 abstracts were identified through the search. Of these, 91 were deemed eligible for review. Three Delphi surveys were sent to 15 international researchers across 4 continents. The results of the review and Delphi were discussed at the in-person meeting to create the consensus statement. Results of this process will be shared.Acknowledgments: Candian Institute of Health Research and Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology
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 | 0.187 | 0.227 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
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".