The Eating Inventory and Body Adiposity from Leanness to Massive Obesity: a Study of 2509 Adults
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
OBJECTIVE: To examine how chronic dietary restraint, disinhibition, and hunger, as assessed by the Eating Inventory, vary over a broad range of BMI values from leanness to massive obesity, in subjects with family obesity. Eating Inventory factors were also studied as a function of personal weight history. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Subjects were 2509 participants in a genetic study of obesity. BMIs ranged from 15 to 87 kg/m2. Six BMI groups were formed (<27, 27 to 30, 30 to 35, 35 to 40, 40 to 45, and >45). RESULTS: Multivariate analyses showed that restraint and disinhibition were significantly associated with BMI in men, whereas only disinhibition was in women. Disinhibition scores correlated strongly with hunger scores in both genders in all BMI categories; dietary restraint tended to correlate with the other two factors positively in leaner subjects and negatively in the highest BMI categories. Highly restrained normal-weight subjects were likely to exhibit disinhibition and hunger, whereas massively obese persons with very high disinhibition scores showed high hunger but little restraint. The highest restraint scores were observed in nonobese adult women with previous obesity in childhood and/or adolescence. DISCUSSION: The factor most strongly associated with BMI in this large population was disinhibition, suggesting that obesity treatment should target behaviors associated with disinhibition, especially in individuals showing a low level of dietary restraint. High restraint scores in formerly obese normal-weight women suggest that dietary restraint may exert a beneficial influence on body weight control under conditions that deserve further investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 it