Reduction in ambulatory distance from childhood through adolescence: The impact of the number and length of steps
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between ambulatory distance with steps/day and increased step length as children age. This is a prospective cohort study. Forty-five children from the QUALITY cohort were assessed at childhood (baseline) and seven years later during adolescence (follow-up). Daily step count was evaluated by accelerometry, step length by a standardized test, and daily ambulatory distance was calculated based on step count and length. Children grew by an average of 0.33 m from childhood to adolescence (p < 0.001). The daily ambulatory distance decreased by an average 3008 m from childhood to adolescence (p < 0.001). Step length increased an average of 0.10 m (p < 0.001) from childhood to adolescence, while the number of steps taken decreased by an average of 5549 steps (childhood to adolescence) (p < 0.001). The change in the number of steps between childhood and adolescence represents 84.6% of the change in the ambulatory distance while the change in step length explained an additional 13.0% The decrease in the ambulatory distance from childhood to adolescence was strongly explained by the decrease in step count; however the increase in step length should not to be neglected.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it