MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765336080 · doi:10.1139/h11-062

Evidence-based risk assessment and recommendations for physical activity clearance: Consensus Document 2011<sup>1</sup>This paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled Evidence-based risk assessment and recommendations for physical activity clearance, and has undergone the Journal’s usual peer review process.

2011· review· en· W2765336080 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Darren E. R. Warburton, Norman Gledhill, Veronica Jamnik, Shannon S. D. Bredin, Don C. McKenzie, James A. Stone, Sarah Charlesworth, Roy J. Shephard

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaYork UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsPopulationMedicineRisk stratificationReferralPsychologyFamily medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q) and the Physical Activity Readiness Medical Evaluation (PARmed-X) are internationally known preparticipation screening tools developed on the basis of expert opinion. The primary purposes of this consensus document were to seek evidence-based support for the PAR-Q and PARmed-X forms, to identify whether further revisions of these instruments are warranted, to determine how people responding positively to questions on the PAR-Q can be safely cleared without medical referral, and to develop exercise clearance procedures appropriate for various clinical conditions across the human lifespan. Seven systematic reviews were conducted, examining physical-activity-related risks and effective risk-stratification procedures for various prevalent chronic conditions. An additional systematic review assessed the risks associated with exercise testing and training of the general population. Two gap areas were identified and evaluated systematically: the role of the qualified exercise professional and the requisite core competencies required by those working with various chronic conditions; and the risks associated with physical activity during pregnancy. The risks associated with being physically inactive are markedly higher than transient risks during and following an acute bout of exercise in both asymptomatic and symptomatic populations across the lifespan. Further refinements of the PAR-Q and the PARmed-X (including online versions of the forms) are required to address the unique limitations imposed by various chronic health conditions, and to allow the inclusion of individuals across their entire lifespan. A probing decision-tree process is proposed to assist in risk stratification and to reduce barriers to physical activity. Qualified exercise professionals will play an essential role in this revised physical activity clearance process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations156
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207