VOL 48: JANUARY • JANVIER 2002 V Canadian Family Physician • Le Médecin de famille canadien 65 CME
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical activity to prevent cardiovascular disease How much is enough? Robert G. Haennel, PHD Francine Lemire, MD O BJECTIVE To review the role of physical activity in primary prevention of cardiovascular (CV) diseases with particular attention to the intensity and amount of physical activity needed to benefit health. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE MEDLINE was searched for articles published in the indexed English literature from January 1991 to December 2000 using key words related to physical activity (eg, exercise, physical fitness), CV and coronary artery disease (CAD) risk factors (eg, diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, obesity). Findings were supplemented by consensus documents and other published literature. Most articles described prospective observational studies. MAIN MESSAG E Clear evidence indicates an inverse linear dose response between amount of physical activity and all-cause mortality, total CV disease, and CAD incidence and mortality. The minimal effective dose is unclear, but physical activity that results in energy expenditure of approximately 4200 kJ•week-1 appears to
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".