Older Adults' Sedentary Behavior and Physical Activity After Hip Fracture: Results From an Outpatient Rehabilitation Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Prolonged sedentary time and limited physical activity can result in deleterious effects on health and mobility, especially for older adults with fall-related hip fracture. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effect of a multidisciplinary clinic on sedentary behavior and physical activity (prespecified secondary outcomes) and provide descriptions of activity patterns over 1 year for men and women. METHODS: We conducted a parallel-group, single-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing a multidisciplinary clinic and usual care (intervention) with usual care (control). We recruited 53 community-dwelling older adults aged 65+ years who were 3 to 12 months postfracture and collected data at baseline, 6, and 12 months; study staff were blinded to group allocation. The clinic included a geriatric assessment by the geriatrician, physiotherapist, and occupational therapist. Referrals were made to other professionals, when indicated. We collected the accelerometer-measured sedentary behavior and physical activity at 3 time points. We used linear mixed-effects models to compare groups at 6 and 12 months and mixed models to compare outcomes between men and women. RESULTS: Participants were sedentary for more than 10 hours of a 13-hour day, and there were no significant differences between the study groups at 6 months (2.4 [95% confidence interval: -22.4 to 27.2] minutes) or 12 months (-3.7 [95% confidence interval: -33.6 to 26.1] minutes). Compared with women, men spent 47.2 min/d more in sedentary time (P = .052) and 43.8 min/d less in light physical activity (P = .047). DISCUSSION: Older adults after hip fracture spend prolonged periods of waking hours sedentary with very little activity.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".