Adherence to 2020 ESC recommendations on physical activity in a population with different cardiovascular risk levels: A prospective population-based study from the CoLaus/PsyCoLaus study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2020, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommends 150 min of moderate or 75 min of vigorous-intensity PA per week. While general population PA adherence is suboptimal, its status among those with previous ASCVD or high ASCVD risk remains unknown. We aimed to assess objective adherence to ESC PA recommendations using accelerometer-based measurement among these populations. We used data from the Swiss CoLaus|PsyCoLaus cohort study (2014–2016). PA was measured using a 14-day wrist accelerometer. Adherence was defined as > 80 % of recommended PA achievement. Adherence was investigated separately among participants with previous ASCVD and among cardiovascular risk groups (based on the Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation SCORE-1 and more recent SCORE2) with simple and multivariable logistic regressions. Participants’ characteristics were also evaluated as independent factors after adjustment. We studied 1867 participants (median age: 61.2 years, 51.3 % female). ESC PA Adherence reached 55.5 % overall, and 37 % in those with previous ASCVD. Multivariable analysis showed no significant association between previous ASCVD or high cardiovascular risk and PA adherence (Odds ratio adjusted [ORa] 0.9, 95 % Confidence Interval [CI] 0.6–1.4 and ORa 0.7, 95 % CI 0.4–1.2, respectively). Age (≥60 years old), obesity, smoking, chronic renal disease, hypertension, diabetes and benzodiazepine use were significantly associated with lower likelihood of PA adherence in multivariable logistic regression. Adherence to ESC PA guidelines, particularly in participants with higher cardiovascular risk, was poor. Since PA adherence was associated with modifiable risk factors (e.g., obesity, smoking, and benzodiazepine use), maintain efforts to implement the ESC recommendations are warranted.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".