Female adolescents with anorexia nervosa and their parents: a case-control study of exercise attitudes and behaviours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies of physical activity in patients with anorexia nervosa (AN) have included a suitable control group. Nor has such research considered the influence of parents' activity on that of their children. Our first prediction was that adolescents with AN would be significantly more active than healthy controls both prior to, and during, the progression of their disorder. We also expected that the activity levels of parents and their daughters would be correlated, and that this relationship would be stronger in patient than control families. Finally, we expected that the AN parents would be more active and report a greater commitment to exercise than the control parents. METHOD: In a case-control design, we employed multiple indicators of physical activity from adolescent females and their parents, using longitudinal, retrospective, self-report measurements. RESULTS: AN patients were significantly more active than controls both during the course of their disorder and prior to its onset. Parents' activity related to their daughter's activity, but this relationship was not stronger in the parents of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Future research is needed to determine whether the relationship between parents' and children's activity levels reflects environmental or genetic influences, or a combination of both factors. The important observation of a significant increase in patients' activity levels at least a year prior to diagnosis of the disorder suggests that enhanced physical activity may play a role in the development of the disorder. This may also serve as an early warning sign of a subclinical eating disorder in adolescent girls.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".