MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048967962 · doi:10.4137/cmed.s23060

Unhealthy Weight Control Practices: Culprits and Clinical Recommendations

2015· review· en· W2048967962 on OpenAlexaff
Zachary M. Ferraro, Sean Patterson, Jean‐Philippe Chaput

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Medicine Insights Endocrinology and Diabetes · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagic bulletWeight controlWeight lossTriageControl (management)MAGIC (telescope)ObesityHealth careMedicinePsychologyPolitical sciencePsychiatryManagementLawEconomicsBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preoccupation with weight status and a desire to lose weight appears common. Many individuals seek "magic bullet" approaches to weight loss and waive the risks of using these products. In this paper, we review the challenges of weight maintenance, highlight some unhealthy weight control practices, and discuss the futility and potential danger of unregulated weight control agents. Novel clinical strategies are discussed that health care providers may use to triage patients with obesity in an attempt to make ethical and personalized treatment decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.390
GPT teacher head0.612
Teacher spread0.222 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Medicine Insights Endocrinology and DiabetesSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207