Physical Activity in Multiple Sclerosis: Real-World Data From Saskatchewan, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Physical activity guidelines for multiple sclerosis (MS) were first published in 2013. Physical activity is safe and beneficial in MS, yet it is unclear if physical activity levels are changing in real-world settings. METHODS: The primary objective of this study is to determine if the physical activity levels of people with MS are changing. Between September 1, 2014, and February 22, 2022, when people first accessed a provincial MS drugs program in Saskatchewan, Canada, they were invited to complete the Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire by mail. Scatter plots of total physical activity (TPA) and health contribution (HC) scores were generated from each person's questionnaire. Multivariable linear regression explored associations and interactions between disease-modifying treatment (DMT), sex, age, age at MS onset, and disease duration on physical activity level. RESULTS: The response rate was 50.8% (505 responses from 993 requests). Of the respondents, 69.7% were female; the mean age was 42.8 (± 11.5) years; median MS disease duration was 6.0 years (IQR, 2.0-14.0); and 47.4% had prior DMT exposure. There was no significant change in physical activity levels of new registrants over 7 years (regression slopes TPA: 0.71, P = .26; HC: 0.61, P = .21). Men reported higher physical activity levels than women (TPA: β = 11.95; P < .001; HC: β = 6.65; P < .001). There were interactions between age and disease duration on activity scores (TPA: β = 0.03; P = .003; HC: β = 0.03; P < .001). DMT exposure was not associated with physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Physical activity levels of people with MS remained suboptimal for health benefits over a 7-year period. Future research should include how to use physical activity guidelines to impact real-world activity levels.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".