Associations between walking behaviour and personal and environmental factors in older adults living in a downtown neighbourhood
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between personal and environmental factors and walking behaviour among older adults.The sample consisted of 60 people aged 65 years or more (mean :7'7 L7.27, range 65 to 92).Perceived environment was assessed using the Neighbourhood Environment Walkability Scale (NEV/S-A, abbreviated version).Physical function was measured using the Functional Fitness Test.Walking behaviour was assessed with pedometers.Three participants had an average number of steps above two standard deviations from the mean, and were considered influential observations.After adjustments for age, health status and physical function, and removing influential observations, increased walking was significantly associated with higher income (:0.274,p<0.05).After adjusting for age, health and income, and removing influential observations increased walking was significantly associated with higher physical function (B: 0.300, p<0.05).No association was found between walking and environmental factors after adjustments for personal factors, and removing influential observations.Among this sample, personal factors (age, annual income, and physical function) accounted for 40.7Yo (R2: 0.407) of the variation.The environment explaine d 8J% (R' : 0.087) of the variation after controlling for personal factors.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it