MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1829136142 · doi:10.1002/hec.3215

Does Overweight and Obesity Impact on Self‐Rated Health? Evidence Using Instrumental Variables Ordered Probit Models

2015· article· en· W1829136142 on OpenAlexfundno aff
John Cullinan, Paddy Gillespie

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Economics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsInstrumental variableOrdered probitOverweightObesityProbit modelProbitEconometricsMedicineEnvironmental healthEconomicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper, for the first time, presents estimates of the causal impact of overweight and obesity on self-rated health (SRH) using instrumental variables (IV) econometric methods. While a number of previous studies have sought to better understand the determinants of SRH, there is no consensus in relation to the impact of overweight and obesity. Using data from a large nationally representative sample of Irish parents and their children, we estimate a range of ordered probit models to isolate the causal effect of overweight and obesity on SRH. Our data includes independently and objectively recorded weight and height measures for parents and their children and we instrument for parental body mass index (BMI) status using the BMI of a biological child. After controlling for a range of individual, socioeconomic, health and lifestyle related variables, we find that being overweight has a negligible impact on SRH, while being obese has a practically and statistically significant negative impact on SRH, with these effects most pronounced for those who are most obese. We find only minor differences in these effects across gender. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations42
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth EconomicsSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207