Association Between a Comprehensive Movement Assessment and Metabolically Healthy Overweight Obese Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior are associated with metabolic health in overweight and obese individuals. However, the role of comprehensive health-related movement guidelines on PA, recreational screen time, and sleep among Metabolically Healthy Overweight-Obese (MHO) individuals is unknown. We investigated differences in comprehensive movement assessment scores between adults classified as MHO or Non-MHO. The sample included 513 adults (46.2% male), aged 19 to 85 years, body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25, from cycle 2005-2006 of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Comprehensive movement assessment outcomes were defined as meeting modified 24-Hour Movement Guidelines criteria, with thresholds adapted for adults. 13.8% of participants were MHO (normal serum glucose, triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure). Only 1.4% of MHO participants met all guidelines. MHO and Non-MHO participants had similar comprehensive movement assessment scores (MHO: 18.3% vs. Non-MHO: 10.9%; p = 0.072). MHO individuals had less continuous recreational screen time than Non-MHO individuals (1.8 ± 1.4 hrs/day vs. 2.5 ± 1.6 hrs/day; p < 0.001). Meeting the recreational screen time recommendation was the only variable associated with the MHO phenotype (OR:4.84 95%CI: 2.33-10.07). This association remained after adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, education, and BMI (OR: 3.53 95%CI: 1.72-7.24). Our results suggest the importance of limiting recreational screen time in adults to optimize cardiometabolic risk profile in individuals living with overweight or obesity. Using movement guidelines with a screen time component to assess the risk associated with health outcomes in adults appears to provide a better assessment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".