MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246919627 · doi:10.22374/cjgim.v10i1.22

Physical Activity Patterns Among Resident and Staff Physicians in Hamilton Teaching Hospitals

2015· article· en· W4246919627 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Oren Steen, Ally P.H. Prebtani

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of General Internal Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObesityPsychological interventionBurnoutMental healthFamily medicineSubstance abuseHealth careGerontologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Objective: This study aimed to evaluate patterns of, and barriers to, physical activity between resident and staff physicians in Hamilton teaching hospitals. Methods: A total of 300 physicians were enrolled in this cross-sectional study that involved an online questionnaire containing 34 questions. Results: The average participant reported 164 minutes per week of moderate to strenuous physical activity. There were no significant differences between resident and staff physicians (154 vs. 185 minutes per week; P = 0.15), between men and women (177 vs. 155 minutes per week; P = 0.31), among the various specialties ( P = 0.54), by number of children ( P = 0.63), or by exercise counselling practices ( P = 0.75). Within the age categories, those aged 35 to 44 years exercised significantly less than the group aged 45 to 54 years (110 vs. 231 minutes per week; P = 0.01). The most commonly cited barriers to physical activity included feeling too tired to exercise after work, the time required for exercise, family responsibilities, and unfavourable weather conditions. Conclusion: The average physician who responded to our survey reported physical activity patterns meeting current Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (CSEP) recommendations regarding physical activity. Numerous barriers to exercise have been cited. More efforts are needed to minimize these barriers, implement strategies for increasing physical activity, and better promote physician health and wellness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of General Internal MedicineSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207