MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2785084580

Providing context to sedentary behaviour in cardiac rehab patients: Linking accelerometry and GPS data

2017· article· en· W2785084580 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nerissa Campbell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)MedicineNova scotiaPsychological interventionSedentary behaviorPopulationDescriptive statisticsSedentary lifestyleGlobal Positioning SystemPhysical therapyPhysical activityGeographyEnvironmental healthComputer scienceNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The current work looked to provide context or location-based information to objective measures of sedentary time in cardiac rehab (CR) patients. Methods: Accelerometry and GPS data was collected simultaneously in 50 patients attending a CR program in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Patients wore the devices for 9 days at the beginning (i.e., within the 1st 3 weeks), end (i.e., within the last 2 weeks) of CR and 3-months after program completion. Minute-by-minute sedentary time calculated from the accelerometry data was linked to GPS data using ArcGIS software and used to identify where sedentary time occurred. Descriptive statistics (frequencies) were calculated to look at the different locations patients were found to be sedentary. Results: We linked > 1268 hours of sedentary and GPS data at each time point. Forty two different location codes were created to best categorize where participants' were when they were sedentary. At the beginning, end and 3-months following CR patients were found to be most sedentary within their home (74%, 67% and 63% of the data linked at Time 1, Time 2, and Time 3, respectively). Other common places included vehicles (different means of transportation), professional centres and residential dwellings different from their home. Conclusion: It appears that patients are most sedentary in their own homes. This work provides valuable information for informing future sedentary behaviour interventions in CR patients and highlights the home environment as an important intervention target in this patient population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→