Determinants of physical activity in older adults: an umbrella review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence for determinants of physical activity in older adults. INTRODUCTION: Physical activity is an important predictor of multi-morbidity, falls, and cognitive decline in older adulthood. Understanding what influences older adults' physical activity behavior is an important first step for guiding effective interventions for promoting physical activity in this population. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This umbrella review will include systematic reviews (including scoping reviews) reporting on the relationship between determinants (also referred to as correlates or factors), measured by either self-report or direct measurement, and physical activity in adults ≥60 years. METHODS: A systematic search of six databases will be completed in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and AgeLine. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts, and full-text articles, and perform data extraction and quality assessment. Evidence for determinants of physical activity will be synthesized using the socio-ecological model. If possible, evidence will be compared by study design, type of physical activity, outcome measure used, setting, and sex. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020159332.
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 | 0.094 | 0.089 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.078 | 0.016 |
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".