Psychobiological effects observed in obese men experiencing body weight loss plateau
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to investigate the psychobiological impact associated with resistance to further weight loss in obese men. Anthropometric and body composition measurements, resting metabolic rate (RMR) measurement, appetite sensation markers, and three questionnaires [Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ), and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)] were assessed at baseline and after 1 month of body weight loss plateau induced by a supervised diet and exercise clinical intervention in 11 obese men. The weight loss plateau corresponded to 11.2% of initial body weight (93.9% from fat stores). However, this amount of weight loss induced a significant decrease in RMR (P <.05) and a significant increase in hunger (P <.05) and desire to eat (P <.05). Using the SF-36 Health Survey, physical and mental health were shown to be unchanged at plateau as compared to baseline. The TFEQ showed that cognitive dietary restraint increased (P <.001) compared to baseline. Finally, depression risk as measured by the BDI significantly increased at plateau (P <.01) compared to baseline. Weight loss until resistance to further weight loss may be detrimental for some psychobiological variables including depression, which emphasizes the relevance of caution and reasonable objectives when prescribing a weight reduction program for obese individuals.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it