Moderate to vigorous physical activity and impact loading independently predict variance in bone strength at the tibia but not at the radius in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were (i) to assess whether daily minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) or vigorous physical activity (VPA) and impact counts (acceleration peaks ≥3.9g) independently predict variance in bone strength in children and youth and (ii) to estimate bone strength gain associated with increases in daily MVPA, VPA, or impact counts. We recorded 7-day activity of 49 participants (mean age 11.0 years, SD 1.7) using accelerometers and estimated radius and tibia bone strength using peripheral quantitative computed tomography. We used linear regression models adjusted for sex, body mass, and muscle area to address our objectives. Daily MVPA (mean 50 min, SD 23) and VPA (mean 17 min, SD 11) or impacts (mean 71 counts, SD 59) did not predict variance in radius strength. Daily VPA (β = 0.24) predicted variance in tibia strength at the distal and shaft sites, and shaft strength was also predicted by MVPA (β = 0.20) and impact counts (β = 0.21). Our models estimated a 3%-6%, 4%, or 4%-11% gain in tibia strength after increasing daily MVPA by 10-20 min, VPA by 5 min, or impacts by 30-100 counts, respectively. In conclusion, daily minutes of MVPA or VPA and impact counts are independent predictors of tibia but not radius strength. Objective recording of activities associated with forearm bone strength and trials testing the efficacy of increasing daily MVPA, VPA, and related impacts on bone strength development in children and youth are 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".