Sexual Orientation Disparities in Weight Status in Adolescence: Findings From a Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A growing number of studies among adult women have documented disparities in overweight adversely affecting lesbian and bisexual women, but few studies have examined sexual orientation-related patterns in weight status among men or adolescents. We examined sexual orientation group trends in BMI (kg/m(2)), BMI Z-scores, and overweight using 56,990 observations from 13,785 adolescent females and males in the Growing Up Today Study (GUTS), a large prospective cohort of US youth. Participants provided self-reported information from six waves of questionnaire data collection from 1998 to 2005. Gender-stratified linear regression models were used to estimate BMI and BMI Z-scores and modified Poisson regression models to estimate risk ratios for overweight, controlling for age and race/ethnicity, with heterosexuals as the referent group. Among females, we observed fairly consistently elevated BMI in all sexual orientation minority groups relative to heterosexual peers. In contrast, among males we documented a sexual-orientation-by-age interaction indicating steeper increases in BMI with age from early-to-late adolescence in heterosexuals relative to sexual orientation minorities. Additional prospective research is needed to understand the determinants of observed sexual orientation disparities and to inform appropriate preventive and treatment interventions. The long-term health consequences of overweight are well-documented and over time are likely to exact a high toll on populations with elevated rates.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".