MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030900428 · doi:10.1177/0017896910369416

Predicting the ‘freshman 15’: Environmental and psychological predictors of weight gain in first-year university students

2010· article· en· W2030900428 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel A. Vella‐Zarb, Frank J. Elgar

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Education Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Lifestyle Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeight gainOverweightResidencePsychologyObesityGerontologyDemographyBody weightMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: (1) To investigate weight gain in first-year university students; and (2) to examine whether environmental and psychological factors, specifically accommodation and stress, predict weight gain. Methods: Eighty-four first-year university students (77 per cent female) were weighed and completed the Perceived Stress Scale (Cohen, Kamarck and Mermelstein, 1983) and a health habits questionnaire at the beginning and end of their first semester of university (Mean duration = 76.67 days, SD = 1.76). Results: Weight gain was small, but significant ( M = 0.89 kg, SD = 3.30). Students living on-campus gained more weight than their off-campus peers, M = 1.65 kg and 0.13 kg respectively, t(82) = −2.32, p < .05. No significant relationship was found between stress and weight change. Conclusions: These results suggest that the first year of university is a critical period for weight gain, especially for students living in residence. Greater understanding of risk factors associated with weight gain in first-year university students, particularly students living in residence, could lead to prevention of this weight gain and potential subsequent overweight and obesity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.375 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations73
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Education JournalSame topicHealth and Lifestyle StudiesFrench-language works237,207