A Comparison of Activity Performance and Physical Activity Level of Obese Men and Women: A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Physical activity levels may vary between obese men and women who have differences in terms of physiological and psychological factors. Limited data show that obese women have reduced motivation for exercise and lower levels of physical activity. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine gender differences in activity performance and physical activity level in Turkish individuals with obesity. Methods: This study included 40 men and 51 women with obesity aged between 18 and 65 years. While the activity performance and satisfaction scores were obtained using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, physical activity level was determined using the step counts recorded for 2 weekdays and 1 weekend day in the Samsung S Health application. Results: The most problematic activity performances were cleaning (50% for men and 90.2% for women), walking (89.7% for men and 72.5% for women), shopping (60% for men and 70.6% for women), climbing stairs (82.5% for men and 76.5% for women), and driving (52.5% for men and 17.6% for women). The mean Canadian Occupational Performance Measure-Performance score of obese men was significantly higher than those of obese women (P < .05). The mean number of step counts recorded during weekdays and weekend day was similar between obese men and women (P > .05). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that the perception of performance in challenging activities is lower in women than men with obesity. Obese men and women have similar physical activity levels that are under the acceptable threshold. Gender-based approaches are needed for activity performance problems in obese individuals during rehabilitative interventions. Cite this article as: Çalık Kütükcü E, Akdal A, Erkoç A, Öksüz MŞ, Yartaşı A, Sayılkan S. A comparison of activity performance and physical activity level of obese men and women: A cross-sectional study. Arch Health Sci Res. 2022; 9(1): 3-8.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".