Sense of Mastery and Metabolic Risk: Moderating Role of the Local Fast-Food Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test the moderating role of the extent of fast-food restaurants in one's immediate environment in the association between mastery and metabolic risk. Higher sense of mastery (perceived control over one's circumstances) has been associated with better metabolic outcomes. Mastery may be instrumental in resisting unhealthful environmental food cues when these become ubiquitous, resulting in a greater health impact of mastery. METHODS: Blood samples were obtained from 344 individuals (50% men), aged 18 to 57 years (mean, 34.9 years), sampled from seven census tracts representing the spectrum of census tract-level socioeconomic status and language (French/English) in Montreal. Risk factors based on standards for high-density lipoprotein and total cholesterol, waist circumference, body mass index, triglycerides, and glycated hemoglobin were summed to obtain a cumulative metabolic risk score. Mastery was self-reported, using a validated scale. The proportion of restaurants classified as fast-food within 500 m of participants' residences was determined, using a geographic information system. Main and interactive effects were tested with Poisson regression, accounting for clustering of observations and participants' age, gender, education, and income. RESULTS: Mastery interacted with fast-food exposure in relation to metabolic risk (p = .03). Higher mastery was significantly associated with lower metabolic risk for participants surrounded by a high proportion of fast food (relative risk, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.84; p < .0001), but not for those living in areas with low proportion of fast-food restaurants (relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.08; p = .37). CONCLUSIONS: A positive relationship between mastery and lower metabolic risk was most apparent in environments with higher fast-food exposure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".