MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977054294 · doi:10.1136/jech.2011.142976l.85

P2-457 Trade is associated with the distribution of under, over, and normal weight among adult residents of low-and-middle-income countries: a multilevel analysis using data from the world health surveys

2011· article· en· W1977054294 on OpenAlexaff
Arijit Nandi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Epidemiology & Community Health · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderweightMedicineOverweightDemographyObesityMarital statusPopulationEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Few empirical studies have investigated the relation between trade and individual weight status. Methods We used data from a sample of 81 449 adults from 24 low-and-middle-income countries who took part in the World Health Survey, a population-based survey of adults in 2002–2003, to examine the multilevel association between trade [ie, levels of trade, imports, and foreign direct investment (FDI)] and individual-level weight status. Results The prevalence of underweight ranged from 2.51% (SE=0.85) in Bosnia-Herzegovina to 34.03% (SE=1.05) in India and the prevalence of overweight ranged from 7.74% (SE=0.69) in India to 49.08% (SE=1.98) in Russia. Marital, economic, and health status were among the most important individual-level predictors of weight. At the macro-level, FDI as a percent of GDP was associated with lower odds of underweight relative to normal weight for rural and urban residents, independently of individual-level covariates and country-level GDP and urbanisation. However, among rural men and women, FDI was positively associated with overweight compared to normal weight; a one unit increase in net inflow of FDI as a percent of GDP was associated with a 15% higher odds of overweight relative to normal weight among rural men (OR=1.15, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.26) and women (OR=1.15, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.23). Conclusion Trade may be associated with individual weight status.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Epidemiology & Community HealthSame topicGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207