Associations between cardiovascular disease risk factors and spinal pain may be moderated by sex and health-related physical activity (CHAMPS Study-DK)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spinal pain has been previously linked with cardiovascular disease risk factors in children. This study investigated the prospective associations between cardiovascular disease risk factors and non-traumatic spinal pain occurrences in children, and examined the moderating role of sex and health-related physical activity in these relationships. METHODS: We used prospective data from the Childhood Health, Activity, and Motor Performance School Study Denmark (CHAMPS Study-DK). The exposure variables were a clustered cardiovascular risk score and homeostasis assessment model-estimated insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) score collected in 2008 and 2010. The spinal pain outcome comprised the number of weeks of non-traumatic spinal pain from 2008-2010 and 2010-2012. Potential confounders included age, sex, and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity. We constructed age-adjusted mixed negative binominal regression models to investigate the prospective associations of cardiovascular disease risk factors and non-traumatic spinal pain, while considering the potential moderating roles of sex and physical activity in these relationships. RESULTS: Girls with low HOMA-IR scores and boys with low clustered cardiovascular disease risk scores, who engaged in higher levels of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, reported more weeks of spinal pain, compared to girls with high HOMA-IR scores (p = 0.001) and boys with high clustered cardiovascular disease risk scores (p = 0.024). whereas boys with higher clustered cardiovascular disease risk who had less time in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity reported more weeks of spinal pain than boys with low clustered cardiovascular disease risk score (p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Our results show that cardiovascular disease risk factors are related to future occurrences of non-traumatic spinal pain. However, these relationships appear complex and dependent on the nature of the interactions with sex and 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".