Secular trend in the development of fatness during childhood and adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the development of fatness, as indexed by skinfold thickness, in healthy Caucasian children and adolescents residing in the same location in Canada in the 1960s and the 1990s. The data comes from two longitudinal studies, conducted approximately 30 years apart, of children aged 8-16 years. The first study (1964-1973) annually measured 207 males and 140 females. The second investigation (1991-1997) repeatedly measured 113 males and 115 females. Identical measurement tools and protocols were used for height, body mass, and skinfolds. Maturational age was estimated as a measure in years from age of peak height velocity. Males from the second investigation matured significantly (P < 0.05) earlier. Multilevel regression modeling was utilized to determine developmental curves for the individuals within the two populations. When differences in height, body mass, and maturity were controlled, skinfold thicknesses of the males and females in the second study were significantly greater (P < 0.05) than age- and sex-matched peers in the first study. This was not seen in models of the BMI. The results suggest that when maturity and size were controlled, the fatness of children and adolescents increased over 30 years.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".