Self-evaluation of lifestyle and assessment of health condition by clinical measurements – A call to the rural population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Although many people know that a healthy lifestyle prevents chronic diseases and improves the quality of life, the best way to invite people from rural areas to take part in health check-ups is still unclear. The aim of this study was to examine the lifestyle and health condition of people from the Carinthia regions in Slovenia.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 140 participants. Data were collected by questionnaire and clinical measurements and were analysed by descriptive statistical methods.Results: Most of the participants were ≥ 60 years old (62%) and 61% were women, 75% had a high BMI and 64% had elevated blood pressure. The older participants ate breakfast more often than younger participants (p = .010). There was a statistically significant connection between the number of daily hot meals and BMI (p = .026) and blood pressure (p = .049). Half of the participants (51%) drank a litre of water per day as recommended. Hiking was the most popular form of physical activity.Conclusions: The study findings recommended using a new way to call people in health check-ups in rural areas and provided information about the kind of lifestyle counselling rural people may need.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".