Relationships between sedentary behaviour, physical activity levelsand red blood cell distribution width in children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Red blood cell distribution width (RDW) is a biomarker for cardiovascular disease(CVD). RDW is associated with sedentary behavior (SB) and physical activity (PA) in adults.To date, no study has evaluated this association in children. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between RDW and SB and PA levels of children and adolescents.Methods: This observational study included data from participants aged 12-20 years in the 2003–2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). SB and PA were measured using accelerometers. Activity levels were classified into intensity categories. Sex specific multivariable regression analyses (adjusted for covariates) were used to explore the associations between SB, PA and RDW. Results: The study included 2143 children and adolescents (1080 boys and 1063 girls). In the fully adjusted regression model for boys, SB was positively associated with RDW (β =0.116,P=0.004) while moderate PA was negatively associated with RDW (β =-0.082, P=0.048). In girls, there were no significant associations between activity levels and RDW. Conclusion: This study provides preliminary evidence of the association between SB, moderate intensity PA and RDW in boys, but not in girls. Further research to determine the mechanisms associated with this relationship and underlying sex differences is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".