Body Image and Dieting Attitudes: Among Preadolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Differences in body image and dieting concerns were assessed in preadolescent boys and girls across the body mass index (BMI) spectrum. The hypothesis was that girls would express more concern with body size, report more dieting, and receive more advice than boys. METHODS: In this cross-sectional descriptive study, age-appropriate figure drawings, the Children's Eating Attitudes Test (ChEAT), the Restraint Scale, and the Body Esteem Scale were administered to participants in the Study of Asthma, Genes and Environment, Manitoba. Responses were compared between genders and correlated with BMI percentiles. RESULTS: A total of 565 10- and 11-year-old children (321 boys) completed questionnaires. Overall, 39% of participants wanted to be thinner, and no significant gender differences based on weight were found. However, the use of figure drawings indicated that girls desired greater changes in body size (p=0.006). Girls had higher Restraint Scale scores (p=0.003), but no statistically significant differences were found in self-reported dieting, ChEAT, or Body Esteem Scale scores. Approximately 25% of children reported receiving frequent weight-related advice. Girls did not report this more often than did boys. Children in the lowest BMI percentile desired the greatest change in body shape and had the highest Restraint Scale scores. CONCLUSIONS: Key gender differences underline the importance of understanding children's attitudes toward body image, weight, and dieting.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".