Short‐Term Effects of a “Health‐At‐Every‐Size” Approach on Eating Behaviors and Appetite Ratings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of a "Health-At-Every-Size" (HAES) intervention on eating behaviors and appetite ratings in 144 premenopausal overweight women. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Women were randomly assigned to one of the 3 groups: HAES group, social support (SS) group, and control group (N = 48 in each group). Interventions were conducted over a 4-month period, and measurements were taken before and after this period. Eating behaviors (cognitive dietary restraint, disinhibition, and susceptibility to hunger) were evaluated by the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire. Appetite ratings (desire to eat, hunger, fullness, and prospective food consumption) were assessed by visual analogue scales before and after a standardized breakfast. RESULTS: More important decreases in susceptibility to hunger and external hunger were observed in the HAES group when compared with the SS group (p=0.05, for susceptibility to hunger) and the control group (p=0.02 and p=0.005, for susceptibility to hunger and external hunger, respectively). In addition, women from the HAES group had more important decreases in postprandial area under the curve for desire to eat (p=0.02) and hunger (p=0.04) when compared with the control group. The change in the desire to eat noted in the HAES group was also different from the one observed in SS group (p=0.02). Women from the HAES group experienced significant weight loss at 4 months (-1.6+/-2.5 kg, p<0.0001), which did not differ significantly from the SS and control groups (p=0.09). An increase in flexible restraint was significantly related to a greater weight loss in both HAES and SS groups (r=-0.39, p<0.01; and r=-0.37, p<0.05, respectively). A decrease in habitual susceptibility to disinhibition was also associated with a greater weight loss in HAES and control groups (r=0.31, p<0.05; and r=0.44, p<0.05, respectively). DISCUSSION: These results suggest that a HAES intervention could have significant effects on eating behaviors and appetite ratings in premenopausal overweight women, when compared with an SS intervention or a control group.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".