Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia has been associated with several health concerns and risks. Overall mortality among persons with schizophrenia has been shown to be about twice that of the general population. There is growing concern that persons with schizophrenia may also be at risk for being overweight or obese, compared with the general population. To examine this possibility, the author compared the distribution of body mass index values (BMI = kg/m2) in people with schizophrenia with that of the Canadian population as a whole. METHOD: Weights and heights were obtained for 183 patients receiving treatment in a hospital-based program for persons with schizophrenia. These BMI values were compared with the results of Statistics Canada's 1996-1997 National Population Health Survey (NPHS), which provided average BMI values for the general population. RESULTS: The average BMI in the study sample was 29.02, with the average for men being 28.49 (range 15.55 to 49.22, SD 6.25) and the average for women, 30.02 (range 19.30 to 45.71, SD 6.45). This is compared with the NPHS average BMI of 26.3 for men and 24.3 for women. The prevalence of obesity (BMI > 30) in the sample was 42.08%, 3.5 times that of the Canadian average of 12% and 2.8 times that of the 15% prevalence in Manitoba. In this sample, 26.78% had a BMI in the acceptable range, in contrast to the 48% of those in the NPHS who had a weight appropriate to their height. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides evidence that the BMI distribution of the sample population is different from that of the national population as represented in the NPHS data. The data indicate that patients with schizophrenia are significantly heavier than the general population.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".