Trends in weight change among Canadian adults.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Longitudinal analyses were used to examine the rate of change of self-reported weight among adults over two-year intervals from 1996/1997 to 2004/2005, and to determine if the pace at which Canadians' weight is changing has slowed down or accelerated. Associations between weight change and sex, age group and body mass index (BMI) category arealsoexamined. DATA SOURCES: The data are from the 1996/1997 through 2004/2005 National Population Health Survey. ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES: Average weight changes over two-year intervals were calculated by sex, age group and BMI category. Linear regression was used to determine if the rate of weight change was stable, increased or decreased over time. MAIN RESULTS: From 1996/1997 to 2004/2005, Canadian adults gained, on average, 0.5 to 1 kg per two-year period. Although people aged 18 to 64 continued to gain weight, the amount gained decreased significantly in the most recent interval, 2002/2003 to 2004/2005. This downturn is due, in part, to a significant decrease in the proportion of men gaining weight during that period. However, among people who gained weight, the amount gained in two years increased over the entire eight-year period.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".