Eating behaviours of non-obese individuals with and without familial history of obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to examine whether eating behaviours and their subscales are associated with familial history of obesity (FHO) in a cohort of 326 non-obese men and women. Anthropometric measurements, eating behaviours (Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire) and dietary intakes (FFQ) have been determined in a sample of 197 women and 129 men. A positive FHO (FHO+) was defined as having at least one obese first-degree relative and a negative FHO (FHO-) as no obese first-degree relative. Men with FHO+ had higher scores of cognitive dietary restraint and flexible restraint than men with FHO-. In women, those with FHO+ had a higher score of disinhibition than women with FHO-. In both men and women, eating behaviours were not significantly associated with the number of obese family members. However, having an obese mother was associated with higher scores of cognitive dietary restraint, flexible restraint and rigid restraint in women. These findings demonstrate that eating behaviours of non-obese subjects are different according to the presence or absence of obese family members. More specifically, having an obese mother is associated with a higher dietary restraint score in women.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".