Joint Associations of Daily Sitting Time and Leisure-Time Physical Activity with Body Fat Distribution Among US Adults, NHANES 2011-2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Prolonged sitting and reduced physical activity lead to low energy expenditures. However, little is known about the impact of daily sitting time jointly with physical activity on body fat distribution.Methods: We investigated the independent and joint associations of daily sitting time and physical activity with body fat distribution among through a cross-sectional analysis of US nationally representative data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2018 among adults aged 20 years or older. Daily sitting time and leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) were self-reported using the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire. Body fat distribution (total and trunk fat percentage) was determined via dual X-ray absorptiometry.Results: Among 10,808 adults (weighted population: 127,746,295; mean [SE] age, 39.4 [0.2] years; 5371 [49.7%] females), about 58.8% of adults spent ≥6h/d sitting; more than half reported no LTPA (inactive) or <150 minutes/week LTPA (insufficiently active) with only 40.6% reported ≥150 minutes/week LTPA (active) in the past week. After adjusting for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, prolonged sitting time and low levels of LTPA were associated with higher total and trunk fat percentages in both sexes. In particular, sitting >8 h/d was associated with 2.03% (95% CI, 1.16 to 2.90) and 1.91% (95% CI, 1.11 to 2.70) increases in trunk fat in male and female adults, respectively, after accounting for LTPA. When stratifying by LTPA, the association between daily sitting time and body fat percentages appeared to be stronger in those who are inactive/insufficient active. In the joint analyses, inactive/insufficiently active adults who reported sitting >8 h/d had the highest total (male: 3.79% [95% CI, 2.75 to 4.82]; female: 3.99% [95%, 3.09 to 4.88]) and trunk body fat percentages (male: 4.07% [95% CI, 2.95 to 5.19]; female: 4.21% [95% CI, 3.09 to 5.32]) compared with those who were active and sitting <4 h/d.Conclusions: Prolonged daily sitting time was associated with increased body fat among US adults. The higher body fat associated with 6 h/d sitting may not be offset by achieving recommended levels of physical 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".