Smoking, activity level and exercise test outcomes in a young population sample without cardiopulmonary disease.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Whether reduced activity level and exercise intolerance precede the clinical diagnosis of cardiopulmonary disorders in smokers is not known. We examined activity level and exercise test outcomes in a young population-based sample without overt cardiopulmonary disease, differentiating by smoking history. METHODS: This was a multiyear cross-sectional study using United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data from 1999-2004. Self-reported activity level and incremental exercise treadmill testing were obtained on survey participants ages 20-49 years, excluding individuals with cardio-pulmonary disease. RESULTS: Three thousand seven hundred and one individuals completed exercise testing. Compared to never smokers, current smokers with >10 pack years reported significantly higher odds of little or no recreation, sport, or physical activity (adjusted OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.12-2.35). Mean perceived exertion ratings (Borg 6-20) at an estimated standardized workload were significantly greater among current smokers (18.3-18.6) compared to never (17.3) and former smokers (17.9) (p<0.05). There were no significant differences in the proportions of individuals across estimated peak oxygen uptake categories among the groups after adjusting for age and sex. Among former smokers, increasing duration of smoking abstinence was associated with significantly lower likelihood of low estimated peak oxygen uptake categorization (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among young individuals without overt cardiopulmonary disease, current smokers had reduced daily activity and higher perceived exertion ratings. Besides supporting early smoking cessation, these results set the stage for future studies that examine mechanisms of activity restriction in young smokers and the utility of measures of activity restriction in the earlier diagnosis of smoking-related diseases.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".