Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 435

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparisons of leisure-time physical activity and cardiorespiratory fitness as predictors of all-cause mortality in men and women

Lee, D-C, Sui, X, Ortega, F B, Kim, Y-S, Church, T S, Winett, R A, Ekelund, U, Katzmarzyk, P T, Blair, S N·2011·British Journal of Sports Medicine
DOI 10.1136/bjsm.2009.066209
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective: To examine the combined associations and relative contributions of leisure-time physical activity (PA) and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) with all-cause mortality. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Aerobics centre longitudinal study. Participants: 31 818 men and 10 555 women who received a medical examination during 1978–2002. Assessment of risk factors: Leisure-time PA assessed by self-reported questionnaire; CRF assessed by maximal treadmill test. Main outcome measures: All-cause mortality until 31 December 2003. Results: There were 1492 (469 per 10 000) and 230 (218 per 10 000) deaths in men and women, respectively. PA and CRF were positively correlated in men (r=0.49) and women (r=0.47) controlling for age (p<0.001 for both). PA was inversely associated with mortality in multivariable Cox regression analysis among men, but the association was eliminated after further adjustment for CRF. No significant association of PA with mortality was observed in women. CRF was inversely associated with mortality in men and women, and the associations remained significant after further adjustment for PA. In the PA and CRF combined analysis, compared with the reference group “not meeting the recommended PA (<500 metabolic equivalent-minute/week) and unfit”, the relative risks (95% CIs) of mortality were 0.62 (0.54 to 0.72) and 0.61 (0.44 to 0.86) in men and women “not meeting the recommended PA and fit”, 0.96 (0.61 to 1.53) and 0.93 (0.33 to 2.58) in men and women “meeting the recommended PA and unfit” and 0.60 (0.51 to 0.70) and 0.56 (0.37 to 0.85) in men and women “meeting the recommended PA and fit”, respectively. Conclusions: CRF was more strongly associated with all-cause mortality than PA; therefore, improving CRF should be encouraged in unfit individuals to reduce risk of mortality and considered in the development of future PA guidelines.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bjsm.2009.066209

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Lee, D.-C., Sui, X., Ortega, F. B., Kim, Y.-S., Church, T. S., Winett, R. A., Ekelund, U., Katzmarzyk, P. T., & Blair, S. N.
Venue
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2010-04-23
Volume
45
Issue
6
Pages
504-510
ISSN
  • 0306-3674 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-0480
DOI
10.1136/bjsm.2009.066209
OpenAlex
W2132064695
Cited by
435
References
6
FWCI
17.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.