Binge‐Eating Disorder in Brazilian Women on a Weight‐Loss Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine binge-eating disorder (BED) and its association with obesity, weight patterns, and psychopathology in a Brazilian sample of female participants of a weight-loss program in São Paulo, Brazil. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Two hundred and seventeen overweight (body mass index >/= 25 kg/m(2)) women, ages 15 to 59 years, enrolled in the Weight Watchers Program were recruited for the study at a program branch meeting after completing the Questionnaire on Eating and Weight Patterns-Revised, Beck Depression Inventory, and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20. Participants were categorized into four groups: those who met questionnaire criteria for BED, those who met questionnaire criteria for bulimia nervosa (BN), those that reported binge eating but did not meet all the criteria for any eating disorder (BE), and those with no eating disorder symptoms (No ED). Groups were compared on measures of weight, depressive symptoms, and alexithymia. RESULTS: Binge eating was frequently reported by women in this study (BED, 16.1%; BN, 4.6%; BE, 22.6%). BED women had significantly higher body mass index, greater highest weight ever, and more frequent weight cycling than the No ED group. BED women also reported more depressive symptoms than BE and No ED women, and were more alexithymic than the No ED group. BE women presented more frequent weigh cycling and were also more depressed and alexithymic than the No ED group. DISCUSSION: BED is not uncommon in overweight Brazilian women, and similar to North American and European samples, it is associated with overweight and higher levels of psychopathology in this population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".