Relationship between lifestyle behaviors and obesity in children ages 9–11: Results from a 12‐country study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess associations between lifestyle behaviors and obesity in a multinational study of children from 12 countries representing a wide range of human development. METHODS: The sample included 6,025 children 9-11 years of age. Behavioral risk factors included nocturnal sleep duration, moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), television viewing (TV time), and healthy and unhealthy diet pattern scores. Multilevel analyses were used to obtain odds ratios for obesity expressed per standard deviation of each behavioral risk factor. RESULTS: The odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for obesity from multilevel, multivariable models were 0.79 (0.71-0.90) for nocturnal sleep duration, 0.52 (0.45-0.60) for MVPA, 1.15 (1.05-1.27) for TV time, 1.08 (0.96-1.20) for healthy diet score, and 0.93 (0.83-1.04) for unhealthy diet score in boys and 0.71 (0.63-0.80) for nocturnal sleep duration, 0.43 (0.35-0.53) for MVPA, 1.07 (0.96-1.19) for TV time, 1.05 (0.93-1.19) for healthy diet score, and 0.96 (0.82-1.11) for unhealthy diet score in girls. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioral risk factors are important correlates of obesity in children, particularly low MVPA, short sleep duration, and high TV viewing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".