Identifying the sociodemographic and work-related factors related to workers’ daily physical activity using a decision tree approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The social and behavioural factors related to physical activity among adults are well known. Despite the overlapping nature of these factors, few studies have examined how multiple predictors of physical activity interact. This study aimed to identify the relative importance of multiple interacting sociodemographic and work-related factors associated with the daily physical activity patterns of a population-based sample of workers. METHODS: Sociodemographic, work, screen time, and health variables were obtained from five, repeated cross-sectional cohorts of workers from the Canadian Health Measures Survey (2007 to 2017). Classification and Regression Tree (CART) modelling was used to identify the discriminators associated with six daily physical activity patterns. The performance of the CART approach was compared to a stepwise multinomial logistic regression model. RESULTS: Among the 8,909 workers analysed, the most important CART discriminators of daily physical activity patterns were age, job skill, and physical strength requirements of the job. Other important factors included participants' sex, educational attainment, fruit/vegetable intake, industry, work hours, marital status, having a child living at home, computer time, and household income. The CART tree had moderate classification accuracy and performed marginally better than the stepwise multinomial logistic regression model. CONCLUSION: Age and work-related factors-particularly job skill, and physical strength requirements at work-appeared as the most important factors related to physical activity attainment, and differed based on sex, work hours, and industry. Delineating the hierarchy of factors associated with daily physical activity may assist in targeting preventive strategies aimed at promoting physical activity in workers.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".