Physical Activity and Health-Related Quality of Life in Adults With a Neurologically-Related Mobility Disability During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Exploratory Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: During the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic various containment strategies were employed. Their impact on individuals with neurological conditions, considered vulnerable to COVID-19 complications, remains to be determined. Objective: To investigate associations between physical activity and health-related quality of life outcomes in individuals with a neurological condition during government mandated COVID-19 restrictions. Methods: An e-survey assessing fear of COVID-19, physical activity level and health-related quality of life outcomes (functional disability and pain, anxiety and depression, loneliness, fatigue, and vitality) was distributed to individuals with a neurologically-related mobility disability living in the United Kingdom. Open-ended questions were also included to contextualize barriers and facilitators to engage in physical activity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Gamma-weighted generalized linear models and tree-structured regression models were employed to determine the associations between physical activity and health-related quality of life. Results: Of 199 responses, 69% reported performing less physical activity compared to pre-pandemic. Tree-structured regression models revealed that lower leisure-time physical activity was significantly associated (p ≤ 0.009) with higher depression and fatigue, but lower vitality. The closure of leisure facilities and organized sport (27%) was the most commonly cited barrier to engage in physical activity, while 31% of participants mentioned concerns around their physical and mental health as a facilitator. Conclusion: Our analysis identified homogenous subgroups for depression, fatigue, and vitality based specifically on leisure-time physical activity cut points, irrespective of additional demographic or situational characteristics. Findings highlight the importance of and need to safely promote leisure-time physical activity during the COVID-19 pandemic in this at-risk population to help support health-related quality of life.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".