The Role of Adolescent Behaviors in the Female–Male Disparity in Obesity Incidence in US Black and White Young Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the United States, black women are at much greater risk for obesity than black men. We explored whether adolescent behaviors (family dinners, hours of television, playing sports with mother, playing sports with father, bouts of physical activity) were associated with gender disparity in 6-year obesity incidence in young adulthood. We used data from the nationally representative National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health to examine adolescent behaviors in nonimmigrant black (n = 1,503) and white (n = 4,452) youths in 1994-95 (aged 11-19 years) and 1995-96 (aged 12-20). We assessed gender disparity in obesity incidence (female incidence minus male incidence) during young adulthood (2001-02; aged 18-26). Standardized gender disparities were calculated using race- and gender-stratified, covariate-adjusted logistic regression models in which males and females were set to the same distributions of adolescent behaviors. In adolescence, black females reported less leisure-time physical activity and lower likelihood of playing sports with either parent compared with black males. Setting adolescent behaviors equal for black males and females did not reduce the estimated gender disparity in obesity incidence (nonstandardized: 9.8 percentage points (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.5, 15.1); fully standardized: 10.2 percentage points (5.2, 15.2)). There was little gender disparity in whites before or after adjustments. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine to what extent behavioral differences during adolescence might account for gender disparity in obesity incidence in black young adults. Male-female differences in these adolescent behaviors did not appear to underlie the gender gap in young adult 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".