MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092573879 · doi:10.1080/19439962.2011.646386

Obesity, Where Is It Driving Us?

2012· article· en· W2092573879 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Lavallière, Grant Handrigan, Normand Teasdale, Philippe Corbeil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transportation Safety & Security · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsObesityHuman factors and ergonomicsInjury preventionPoison controlRisk analysis (engineering)MedicineReflection (computer programming)PsychologyApplied psychologyComputer scienceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity is recognized as an important issue that has an impact on several areas of our daily lives, such as driving. In the literature there exists an association between obesity and motor vehicle crashes. The goal of this article is to promote insightful reflection and discussion around this emerging topic. Searches were conducted on Pubmed. Search terms were “obesity” and “driving.” The literature was sorted into a summary of the general ideas and is presented for discussion. Relevant issues discussed include anthromechanical issues and car design, seat belt usage, and obesity-related health complications (ocular pathologies, diabetic complications, and obstructive sleep apnoea/hypopnea). Finally, though limited prevention strategies exist for these issues in the literature, some strategies are presented for consideration. With such a complex issue, there is no simple solution. Education is the first step, and with a comprehensive understanding of the risks, actions can be taken to prevent these issues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transportation Safety & SecuritySame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207