MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390080078 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igad104.2307

DETERMINANTS OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN COMMUNITY-DWELLING OLDER ADULTS: AN UMBRELLA REVIEW

2023· article· en· W4390080078 on OpenAlexaff
Cassandra D’Amore, Stéphanie Saunders, Neera Bhatnagar, Lauren E. Griffith, Julie Richardson, Marla Beauchamp

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWalkabilityGerontologyMedicineLongitudinal studyPhysical activityMental healthPsychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Physical activity (PA) is an important modifiable factor for noncommunicable diseases, mental health, and functional trajectories as we age. The World Health Organization highlights the need to mobilize policies targeted toward modifiable determinants of healthy aging. Therefore, understanding the current evidence for PA determinants is crucial to achieving these goals. This umbrella review aimed to summarize the determinants of PA in older adults. A research librarian searched six databases. Systematic and scoping reviews were included if they investigated community-dwelling people with a mean age of 60 years or older and examined a relationship between any type of PA and a determinant. Two independent reviewers screened 17,277 references and 11 reviews were ultimately included. Of the countries reported, 78% were high-income and zero were lower-income countries. Three of the eleven reviews focused on specific clinical populations living in the community. Only 6% of studies included in all reviews had longitudinal designs. Included studies focused on a variety of types of PA (e.g., total PA, walking, leisure-time PA) and measures of PA, with 76% using self-report, 15% using direct measures (e.g., accelerometry), 3% using both types, and 6% with no outcome measure reported. Physical environment determinants were the most commonly assessed (6/11) with more than 70% of the summarized relationships demonstrating null associations. Three out of four reviews reported a positive relationship between walkability and PA in general community-dwelling older adults. Further prospective longitudinal studies are needed to improve our current understanding of the determinants of PA in community-living older people.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0190.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in Aging→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→