MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972609593 · doi:10.1016/j.gloepi.2019.100009

Decomposing the effects of physical activity and cardiorespiratory fitness on mortality

2019· article· en· W2972609593 on OpenAlexaff
Julian Wolfson, Steven D. Stovitz, Steven N. Blair, Xuemei Sui, Duck-chul Lee, Ian Shrier

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Epidemiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersSixth Framework ProgrammeNational Institutes of HealthMinisterio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte
KeywordsCardiorespiratory fitnessMediationLongitudinal studyPhysical activityInteractionMedicineCausal modelInternal medicinePhysical fitnessDemographyPsychologyGerontologyPhysical therapyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characterizing the effects of physical activity (PA) and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) on mortality is challenging because the causal relationship between PA, CRF, and other cardiovascular risk factors is unclear. To better understand the effects of PA and CRF on mortality, we re-analyzed data from 42,373 participants in the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study (ACLS) using a modified version of VanderWeele's four-way causal effect decomposition method. The method was applied to decompose the causal effects of PA and CRF on median time to death into parts reflecting mediation, interaction, mediated interaction, and neither interaction nor mediation. We found that 67% of the effect of PA on mortality was mediated by CRF, while the effect of CRF was not significantly mediated by PA. The effects of both PA and CRF were mediated to a small extent by hypertension and diabetes. There were no meaningful interactions. Our findings strengthen the evidence that the benefit on mortality from PA is largely mediated by its effect on CRF, and support efforts to increase longevity by encouraging PA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.349 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal EpidemiologySame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207