Overweight Children Reduce Their Activity Levels Earlier in Life Than Healthy Weight Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine differences in the time overweight and nonoverweight youth spend on light, moderate, hard, and very hard activity plus gender and age differences in activity patterns. DESIGN AND SETTING: This study was a cross-sectional design in a primary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 197 children and adolescents (4-16 years) participated. The overweight group (n = 107) were on a waiting list for an obesity treatment program and were defined as overweight, with a body mass index >95th percentile, and the nonoverweight group (n = 90) were volunteers recruited via advertisements and had a body mass index <75th percentile. INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: To determine activity patterns and perception of activity level, an interview was conducted with the child and a parent using a validated 7-day recall. Body fat was measured with bioelectrical impedance. RESULTS: There was a negative correlation between adiposity and total amount of activity performed, with the amount of moderate activity the best predictor of obesity. Girls did less activity than boys whether overweight or not. Between the ages of 4 and 7 years, overweight and nonoverweight subjects did similar amounts of activity. In the older subjects, the activity of the overweight was less than in nonoverweight. The overweight subjects perceived themselves to be just as active as others their same age and sex. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians need to be aware that overweight children and adolescents are less active than nonoverweight children at an earlier age, particularly females, but feel that their activity level is similar to that of nonobese children.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".