Changes in work factors and concurrent changes in leisure time physical activity: a 12-year longitudinal analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There is a paucity of longitudinal population-based studies examining whether changes in work factors are associated with concurrent changes in leisure time physical activity (LTPA). This study examines this issue using 12 years of longitudinal survey data. METHODS: Data were drawn from the Canadian National Population Health Survey. The initial analytical sample in 1994 of 6407 working individuals was followed every 2 years from 2000 to 2010. Seven work factors were measured as independent variables: skill discretion, decision authority, psychological demands, physical exertion, number of jobs, hours at work and shift schedule. LTPA was categorised as inactive, moderately active or active based on metabolic equivalent task values. Fixed-effects multinomial logistic models were used to examine associations between work factors and LTPA controlling for time-invariant effects and adjusted for covariates. RESULTS: Workers with lower skill discretion (OR=0.96; 95% CI 0.92 to 0.99), higher psychological demands (OR=0.95; 95% CI 0.92 to 0.99), higher physical exertion (OR=0.93; 95% CI 0.88 to 0.99) and longer work hours (OR=0.97; 95% CI 0.95 to 098) were associated with a lower odds of transitioning from inactive to active and moderately active. There was no evidence of effect modification by age or sex. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that as participants' skill discretion decreased, and their physical and psychological demands, and work hours increased, their likelihood of becoming more active and moderately active also decreased, supporting the value of targeting improvements in these work factors for physical activity interventions.
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) | 0.001 | 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".