Accelerometer-Based Physical Activity Patterns and Associations With Outcomes Among Individuals With Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examined patterns of physical activity and associations with pain, function, fatigue, and sleep disturbance among individuals with knee or hip osteoarthritis. METHODS: Participants (n = 54) were enrolled in a telephone-based physical activity coaching intervention trial; all data were collected at baseline. Self-reported measures of pain and function (WOMAC [Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index] subscales), fatigue (10-point numeric rating scale), and PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System) Sleep Disturbance were collected via telephone. Accelerometers were mailed to participants and were worn for at least 3 days. Proportion of time participants spent in sedentary behavior during the morning (from wake until 12:00 pm), afternoon (12:00 pm until 5:59 pm) and evening (6:00 pm until sleep) each day was averaged across all days of wear. Pearson correlations assessed associations between activity and self-reported measures. RESULTS: Participants spent a large proportion of time in sedentary behavior: 65.6% of mornings, 70.0% of afternoons, and 76.6% of evenings. Associations between proportion of time spent in sedentary behavior and reported outcomes were generally strongest in the afternoon, strongest for WOMAC function, and lowest for PROMIS Sleep Disturbance. In the evening hours, sedentary time was most strongly associated with fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings stress the importance of reducing sedentary behavior among adults with osteoarthritis and suggest behavioral interventions may be strengthened by considering patients' within-day variation in symptoms and activity.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".