Influence of Anthropometrics on Step-Rate Thresholds for Moderate and Vigorous Physical Activity in Older Adults: Scientific Modeling Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Adults and older adults are recommended to engage in 150 minutes of moderate (MPA) to vigorous (VPA) aerobic physical activity (MVPA) per week, with the heuristic message of 3000 steps in 30 minutes (100 steps per minute [spm]). However, this message is based on adult populations, with a paucity of research on step-rate thresholds that correspond to absolute MVPA (moderate=3 metabolic equivalents [METs], vigorous=6 METs) and relative MVPA (moderate=40% estimated METmax, vigorous=60% estimated METmax) in older persons, who have lower stride lengths and a lower exercise capacity. Also, there is a need to consider the influence of anthropometric differences when quantifying the relationship between step rate and intensity-related physical activity. Objective: This study assessed absolute and relative MVPA step-rate thresholds and anthropometric factors (ie, height, leg length, and body mass index [BMI]) in older adults. Methods: Nineteen older adults (7 females; age 69 years, SD 2, BMI 26 kg/m2, SD 4) completed a staged treadmill walking protocol: six minutes at 2.4, 3.2, 4.0, 5.6, and 6.4 km/h. Steps were manually counted and volume rate of oxygen consumed (VO2) was measured via indirect calorimetry. Aerobic fitness was estimated via the submaximal single-stage treadmill protocol. Results: When BMI was considered, mixed effects modeling revealed absolute and relative MPA step-rate thresholds of 108 spm and 117 spm, respectively. Absolute and relative VPA corresponded to step rates of 135 spm and 132 spm, respectively. Neither height nor leg length improved the ability of the model to predict stepping cadence from METs. Conclusions: In general, older adults need to walk faster than 100 spm (ie, approximately 110 spm) to reach MPA and in excess of approximately 130 spm to achieve VPA, depending on BMI status. Health care professionals and researchers should adjust cadence-based recommendations for differences in BMI in their older patients and consider using relative intensity to most appropriately tailor their physical activity recommendations.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".