MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406113701 · doi:10.1093/abm/kaae082

Exploring novel determinants of exercise behavior: a lagged exposure-wide approach

2024· article· en· W4406113701 on OpenAlexaff
Harold Lee, Eric S. Kim, Y.-C. Kim, David E. Conroy, Tyler J. VanderWeele

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Behavioral Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of MichiganNational Institute on AgingU.S. Social Security Administration
KeywordsHealth psychologyPsychologyClinical psychologyMedicinePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many middle-aged to older adults do not engage in regular exercise at all, despite its importance for healthy aging. Extensive research grounded in behavioral and social science theories has identified numerous determinants of exercise. However, few studies used an exposure-wide approach, a data-driven exploratory method particularly useful for identifying novel determinants. METHODS: We used data from 13 771 participants in the Health and Retirement Study, a diverse, national panel study of adults aged >50 years in the United States, to evaluate 62 candidate determinants of exercise participation. Candidate predictors were drawn from the following domains: health behaviors, physical health, psychological well-being, psychological distress, social factors, and work. We used Poisson regression with robust error variance to individually regress exercise in the outcome wave (t2: 2014/2016) on baseline candidate predictors (at t1: 2010/2012) controlling for all covariates in the previous wave (t0: 2006/2008). RESULTS: Some physical health conditions (eg, physical functioning limitations and lung disease), psychological factors (eg, health mastery, purpose in life, and positive affect), and social factors (eg, helping others, religious service attendance, and volunteering) were robustly associated with increased subsequent exercise. Among factors related to psychological distress, perceived constraints stood out as a factor in reducing exercise. CONCLUSIONS: We identified potentially novel exercise determinants, such as helping friends/neighbors/relatives, religious attendance, and volunteering, that have not been captured using a theory-driven approach. Future studies validating these findings experimentally in midlife and older adults are needed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.503
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.055 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Behavioral MedicineSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207