Adults with Greater Weight Satisfaction Report More Positive Health Behaviors and Have Better Health Status Regardless of BMI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prior studies suggest that weight satisfaction may preclude changes in behavior that lead to healthier weight among individuals who are overweight or obese. OBJECTIVE: To gain a better understanding of complex relationships between weight satisfaction, weight-related health behaviors, and health outcomes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of data from the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study (ACLS). PARTICIPANTS: Large mixed-gender cohort of primarily white, middle-to-upper socioeconomic status (SES) adults with baseline examination between 1987 and 2002 (n = 19,003). MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLES: Weight satisfaction, weight-related health behaviors, chronic health conditions, and clinical health indicators. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Chi-square test, t-tests, and linear and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Compared to men, women were more likely to be dieting (32% women; 18% men) and had higher weight dissatisfaction. Men and women with greater weight dissatisfaction reported more dieting, yo-yo dieting, and snacking and consuming fewer meals, being less active, and having to eat either more or less than desired to maintain weight regardless of weight status. Those who were overweight or obese and dissatisfied with their weight had the poorest health. CONCLUSION: Greater satisfaction with one's weight was associated with positive health behaviors and health outcomes in both men and women and across weight status groups.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".