Trends in adherence to the muscle-strengthening activity guidelines in the US over a 20-year span
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Purpose to evaluate the prevalence and temporal trends in adherence to muscle-strengthening activity (MSA) guidelines among the US population from 1997 to 2018 (pre-Covid 19). METHODS: We used nationally representative data from the National Health Interview Survey of the US (NHIS; a cross-sectional household interview survey). We pooled data from 22 consecutive cycles (1997 to 2018) and estimated prevalence and trends of adherence to MSA guidelines among adults aged 18-24 years, 25-34 years, 35-44 years, 45-64 years, and ≥ 65 years. RESULTS: A total of 651,682 participants (mean age 47.7 years [SD = 18.0], 55.8% women) were included. The overall prevalence of adherence to MSA guidelines significantly increased (p < .001) from 1997 to 2018 (19.8% to 27.2%, respectively). Adherence levels significantly increased (p < .001) for all age groups from 1997 to 2018. Compared with their white non-Hispanic counterparts, the odds ratio for Hispanic females was 0.5 (95% CI = 0.4-0.6). CONCLUSIONS: It is over a 20-year span, adherence to MSA guidelines increased across all age groups, although the overall prevalence remained below 30%. Future intervention strategies to promote MSA are required with a particular focus on older adults, women, Hispanic women, current smokers, those with low educational levels, and those with functional limitations or chronic conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".