MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068496920 · doi:10.1038/ijo.2015.48

Psychosocial factors and obesity in 17 high-, middle- and low-income countries: the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiologic study

2015· article· en· W2068496920 on OpenAlexaff
Annika Rosengren, Koon Teo, Sumathy Rangarajan, Conrad Kabali, Itumeleng P. Khumalo, V. Raman Kutty, Rajeev Gupta, Rita Yusuf, Romaina Iqbal, Noor Hassim Ismail, Yasin Devran Altuntaş, Roya Kelishadi, Rafael Díaz, Álvaro Avezum, Jephat Chifamba, Katarzyna Zatońska, Likun Wei, Xinyang Liao, Patricio López‐Jaramillo, Afzalhussein Yusufali, Pamela Serón, Scott A. Lear, Salim Yusuf

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Obesity · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesProvidence Health CareMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersFogarty International Center
KeywordsMedicineObesityAbdominal obesityPsychosocialBody mass indexDemographyAnthropometryGerontologyProspective cohort studyConfoundingInternal medicinePsychiatryMetabolic syndrome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Psychosocial stress has been proposed to contribute to obesity, particularly abdominal, or central obesity, through chronic activation of the neuroendocrine systems. However, these putative relationships are complex and dependent on country and cultural context. We investigated the association between psychosocial factors and general and abdominal obesity in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiologic study. SUBJECTS/METHODS: This observational, cross-sectional study enrolled 151 966 individuals aged 35-70 years from 628 urban and rural communities in 17 high-, middle- and low-income countries. Data were collected for 125 290 individuals regarding education, anthropometrics, hypertension/diabetes, tobacco/alcohol use, diet and psychosocial factors (self-perceived stress and depression). RESULTS: After standardization for age, sex, country income and urban/rural location, the proportion with obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg m(-)(2)) increased from 15.7% in 40 831 individuals with no stress to 20.5% in 7720 individuals with permanent stress, with corresponding proportions for ethnicity- and sex-specific central obesity of 48.6% and 53.5%, respectively (P<0.0001 for both). Associations between stress and hypertension/diabetes tended to be inverse. Estimating the total effect of permanent stress with age, sex, physical activity, education and region as confounders, no relationship between stress and obesity persisted (adjusted prevalence ratio (PR) for obesity 1.04 (95% confidence interval: 0.99-1.10)). There was no relationship between ethnicity- and sex-specific central obesity (adjusted PR 1.00 (0.97-1.02)). Stratification by region yielded inconsistent associations. Depression was weakly but independently linked to obesity (PR 1.08 (1.04-1.12)), and very marginally to abdominal obesity (PR 1.01 (1.00-1.03)). CONCLUSIONS: Although individuals with permanent stress tended to be slightly more obese, there was no overall independent effect and no evidence that abdominal obesity or its consequences (hypertension, diabetes) increased with higher levels of stress or depression. This study does not support a causal link between psychosocial factors and abdominal 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations43
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ObesitySame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207