Dietary restraint moderates genetic risk for binge eating.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dietary restraint is a prospective risk factor for the development of binge eating and bulimia nervosa. Although many women engage in dietary restraint, relatively few develop binge eating. Dietary restraint may increase susceptibility for binge eating only in individuals who are at genetic risk. Specifically, dietary restraint may be a behavioral exposure factor that activates genetic predispositions for binge eating. We investigated this possibility in 1,678 young adolescent and adult same-sex female twins from the Minnesota Twin Family Study and the Michigan State University Twin Registry. Twin moderation models were used to examine whether levels of dietary restraint moderate genetic and environmental influences on binge eating. Results indicated that genetic and nonshared environmental factors for binge eating increased at higher levels of dietary restraint. These effects were present after controlling for age, body mass index, and genetic and environmental overlap among dietary restraint and binge eating. Results suggest that dietary restraint may be most important for individuals at genetic risk for binge eating and that the combination of these factors could enhance individual differences in risk for binge eating.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".