Characterizing objective and self-report habitual physical activity and sedentary time in outpatients with an acquired brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Outpatients with an acquired brain injury (ABI) experience physical, mental, and social deficits. ABI can be classified into two subgroups based on mechanism of injury: mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI; e.g., concussion) and other ABI (e.g., stroke, brain aneurysm, encephalitis). Our understanding of habitual activity levels within ABI populations is limited because they are often collected using self-report measures. The purpose of this study was to, 1) describe the habitual activity levels of outpatients with ABI using objective and self-report monitoring, and 2) compare the activity levels of outpatients with mTBI vs. other ABI. Sixteen outpatients with other ABI (mean ± standard deviation: [58 ± 13] years, 9 females) and 12 outpatients with mTBI ([48 ± 11] years, 9 females) wore a thigh-worn activPAL 24 h/day (h/day) for 7-days. Outpatients with ABI averaged (6.0 ± 2.3) h/day of upright time, (10.6 ± 2.2) h/day of sedentary time, (5.6 ± 2.7) h/day in prolonged sedentary bouts >1 h, (5960 ± 3037) steps/day, and (11 ± 13) minutes/day (min/day) of moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). There were no differences between activPAL-derived upright, sedentary, prolonged sedentary time, and physical activity between the mTBI and other ABI groups (all, p > 0.31). Outpatients with ABI overestimated their MVPA levels (+138 min/week) and underestimated sedentary time (−4.3 h/day) compared to self-report (all, p < 0.001). Despite self-reporting high activity levels, outpatients with ABI objectively exhibit highly inactive and sedentary lifestyles. The habitual movement behaviours of our sample did not differ by mechanism of injury (i.e., mTBI versus other ABI). Targeting reductions in objectively measured sedentary time are needed to progressively improve the habitual movement behaviours of outpatients with ABI.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".