MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056902345 · doi:10.1038/oby.2003.109

Eating Behaviors and Indexes of Body Composition in Men and Women from the Québec Family Study

2003· article· en· W2056902345 on OpenAlexaffabout
Véronique Provencher, Vicky Drapeau, Angelo Tremblay, Jean‐Pierre Després, Simone Lemieux

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposition (language)MedicineBody mass indexPsychologyGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To put into relationship the dietary and anthropometric profile of men and women with their eating behaviors (cognitive dietary restraint, disinhibition, and susceptibility to hunger) and to assess whether gender and obesity status influence these associations. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Anthropometric measurements (including visceral adipose tissue accumulation), dietary profile (3-day food record), and eating behaviors (Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire) were determined in a sample of 244 men and 352 women. RESULTS: Women had significantly higher cognitive dietary restraint and disinhibition scores than men (p < 0.0001). In both genders, scores for disinhibition and susceptibility to hunger, but not for cognitive dietary restraint, were higher in obese subjects than in overweight and nonobese subjects (p < 0.05). Positive correlations were observed between rigid restraint and most of the anthropometric variables studied (0.12 <or= r <or= 0.16). Moreover, in women, flexible restraint was negatively associated with body fat and waist circumference (r = -0.11). Cognitive dietary restraint and rigid restraint were positively related to BMI among nonobese women (0.19 <or= r <or= 0.20), whereas in obese men, cognitive dietary restraint and flexible restraint tended to be negatively correlated with BMI (-0.20 <or= r <or= -0.22; p = 0.10). DISCUSSION: Gender could mediate associations observed between eating behaviors and anthropometric profile. It was also found that disinhibition and susceptibility to hunger are positively associated with the level of obesity. On the other hand, cognitive dietary restraint is not consistently related to body weight and adiposity, whereas rigid and flexible restraint are oppositely associated to obesity status, which suggests that it is important to differentiate the subscales of cognitive dietary restraint. Finally, counseling aimed at coping with disinhibition and susceptibility to hunger could be of benefit for the long-term treatment of 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations307
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity ResearchSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207