The northeastern Ontario men's health study: test-retest reliability of the Physical Activity Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The test-retest reliability sub-study of Northeastern Ontario Men's Health Study (NEOMHS) was conducted on the physical activity section of the questionnaire (see Appendix A). A random sample of controls who had previously responded to the questionnaire participated in the reliability sub-study (n = 95, response rate = 66%). The weighted kappa statistic and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to assess reliability. ICC for average lifetime activity was 0.63. For occupational activity, weighted kappas ranged from 0.56 (early 20s) to 0.65 (5 years ago). Leisure-time activity was less reliably recalled: kappa = 0.10 (strenuous, leisure-time activity in the mid-teens) to 0.49 (strenuous, leisure-time activity 5 years ago). Since the reliability of physical activity is imperfect, there may be misclassification of exposure to physical activity. Bias in the association of physical activity and prostate cancer, may occur especially if the age-period of interest is during youth (mid-teens to early 30s).
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".