MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W173242301

General Introduction: Amsterdam Growth and Health Longitudinal Study

2004· article· en· W173242301 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
H.C.G. Kemper, J. Snel, Willem van Mechelen

Bibliographic record

VenueQueensland's institutional digital repository (The University of Queensland) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyLongitudinal studyMultidisciplinary approachGerontologyLongitudinal dataAlcohol consumptionMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Environmental healthPsychologyDemographyGeographySocial scienceSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A unique observational long-term study In a long follow-up period of 23 years about 600 teenagers were observed till their young adult age in order to investigate the longitudinal relationship between health and lifestyles considering physical activity, diet, smoking and alcohol consumption. Longitudinal studies with a follow-up lasting for a quarter of a century are very rare and the Amsterdam Growth and Health Longitudinal Study (AGAHLS) is indeed unique among them. The focus is multidisciplinary and involves both physical and psychological determinants in relation to a wide range of health outcomes. The multiple measurements were carefully standardized in nine waves of data collection, thus producing a high-quality data set, which has been analyzed by the application of advanced statistical techniques. The monograph provides not only an overview of 23 years of follow-up, it also summarizes over 200 scientific publications and 10 PhD theses. This publication is especially recommended to investigators planning longitudinal research, to health workers, and to authorities who like to implement health promotional activities in their community.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQueensland's institutional digital repository (The University of Queensland)Same topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207