Is dieting behaviour decreasing in young adolescents?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report trends in underweight, overweight and obesity in 12-15-year-old adolescents and examine changes in dieting behaviour, which have been less well documented. DESIGN: Comparison of two independent representative cross-sectional surveys. SETTING: Northern Ireland. SUBJECTS: Weight and height were objectively measured in 1324 boys and 1160 girls in 1996 and 1274 boys and 1374 girls in 2007. Participants reported whether they were following any particular diet including a self-proposed or prescribed weight-reduction diet. RESULTS: Overweight and obesity increased in girls from 15 % to 23 % and 2 % to 6 %, respectively. Increases were more modest in boys with overweight increasing from 13 % to 18 % and obesity from 3 % to 6 %. The proportion of underweight adolescents decreased from 9 % to 6 % in girls and 8 % to 5 % in boys. Evidence of social disparity was observed in girls from a manual socio-economic background, with overweight/obesity prevalence rates increasing from 21 % to 36 % compared with 15 % to 26 % in girls from a non-manual background. Despite these trends fewer adolescents, in particular girls, reported following weight-reduction diets (14 % of overweight/obese girls in 2007 v. 21 % in 1996; 8 % of boys in 2007 v. 13 % in 1996). Of these girls, the proportion from a manual background following weight-reduction diets decreased from 25 % to 11 %. CONCLUSIONS: Overweight and obesity are continuing to increase in adolescents despite government and media awareness strategies. There also appears to be reduced dieting behaviour, despite increasing body weight, particularly in girls from manual socio-economic backgrounds.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".