MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Intersecting risk factors for physical inactivity among Canadian adults

2023· article· en· W4388870343 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogistic regressionDemographyMedicineLatent class modelPopulationPhysical activityGerontologyEnvironmental healthPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: On average, 45% of Canadian adults meet the recommended 150 minutes per week of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. This singular statistic masks a wide range of adherence levels among different groups within the population. The purpose of this paper is to determine how sex, age, and family arrangement intersect with known risk factors for physical inactivity to identify groups within the Canadian population most at risk of not meeting the physical activity recommendation. Methods: Using six combined cycles of the Canadian Health Measures Survey (from 2007 to 2019), this study examines how the percentage of Canadian males and females aged 18 to 79 years meeting the physical activity recommendation differs across sociodemographic, family arrangement, and health factors. Logistic regression was used to examine whether the association between specific factors and adherence to the physical activity recommendation differed by sex. Latent class analysis was used to identify sex-specific combinations of sociodemographic, family arrangement and health-related factors within the Canadian population that are associated with varying levels of adherence to the physical activity recommendation. Results: More males met the physical activity recommendation compared with females (49% versus 38%). Latent classes with the lowest adherence to the physical activity recommendation (19% among females and 29% among males) primarily included those who were single or married with no children and who had a high probability of having many risk factors for physical inactivity, including being older, having a lower education, having lower income, smoking, having central adiposity, and having poor or fair self-rated general health. Latent classes with the highest adherence to the physical activity recommendation (61% among females and 67% among males) primarily included individuals with no spouse and no children and who had a low probability of having any risk factors for physical inactivity. For females, an additional class (32% of which met the physical activity recommendation) comprised young single mothers who had several risk factors for physical inactivity, including having low income, smoking and having central adiposity. Interpretation: Understanding how risk factors for physical inactivity intersect with sex, age, and family arrangement may inform strategies aimed at increasing physical activity among those who are most vulnerable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→