Bibliographic record
Abstract
International contributions to this issue of JAPA cover a diverse range of topics including the effects of respiratory resistance training, understanding physical activity patterns of the emerging "Boomer" cohort, the influence of physical inactivity on chronic disease, validation of a new telephone-based physical activity assessment tool, the "Phone-FITT," investigation of factors associated with nonparticipation by older adults in physical activity, and an examination of the 6-min walk test employed under different test conditions.In keeping with JAPA's international flavor, this issue includes authors from Australia, Netherlands, Greece, Canada, and the United States.Although all seven contributions to this issue of JAPA make a substantive contribution to the growing body of physical activity and aging literature, three articles in our opinion should be highlighted.Participants new to exercise often complain that they are "winded" and uncomfortable, especially when exercising at intensities (moderate to vigorous) required to engender fitness and health (Paterson, Jones, & Rice, 2007).Progressive respiratorymuscle conditioning, as described by Watsford and Murphy, reduced subjective perceived exertion and submaximal exercise heart rate and improved ventilation and treadmill performance time in older women.What makes this study unique is the progressive training regimen and the fact that the authors chose to evaluate change based on performance outcomes that challenge respiratory function, rather than less intense activities.This exercise strategy might benefit both healthy older adults and those undergoing respiratory rehabilitation.As gerontologists we have for some time heralded the coming tide of older adults, dubbed the "Boomer" generation (Wister, 2005).Swan and colleagues provide us with some insight into the physical activity characteristics of this emerging cohort.Moderate physical activity levels are similar across 10-year age cohorts, and significant declines are only observed in the oldest old, suggesting that Boomers continue to be as physically active as younger adult groups, at least for moderate-intensity activities.The authors point out that this is likely influenced by the fact that Boomers enjoy more leisure time, a result of retirement; higher socioeconomic status; and better health and health care than older "traditional" aging cohorts.Unfortunately, vigorous and strengthening activities, both being very important components of fitness, do not follow the same trajectory but decline with increasing age.Although this analysis was limited to 3 years, this article should help generate discussion among health promoters on how to more effectively target physical activity interventions in the future.Most physical activity questionnaires neglect to capture the frequency, intensity, and duration (time) of physical activity performed.This is especially true of physical activity tools specific to older adults, which often have limited evidence to support their suitability, as was evident in a systematic review previously published in JAPA (Jørstad-Stein et al., 2005).Gill, Jones, Zou, and Speechley have taken the next step with the development and testing of the Phone-FITT questionnaire.The Phone-FITT generates a score based on the frequency, intensity, and duration
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.268 | 0.141 |
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".