Intentional weight loss was associated with lower mortality, whereas unintentional weight loss was associated with increased mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gregg EW, Gerzoff RB, Thompson TJ, et al. Intentional weight loss and death in overweight and obese U.S. adults 35 years of age and older. Ann Intern Med2003 ; 138 : 383 –9 [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTION: Are weight change and intention to lose weight associated with all cause mortality in adults who are overweight or obese? Prospective cohort study with 9 years of follow up (mean follow up 8 y). USA. 6391 adults ≥35 years of age (mean age 54 y, 55% men, 87% white) with a body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2 before weight loss. Weight loss intention and weight change during the previous year were assessed by self report in a supplemental survey to the 1989 National Health Interview Survey. The same survey was used to determine age, ethnicity, sex, smoking status, self rated health, hospital admissions, physician … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DAnnals%2Bof%2BInternal%2BMedicine%26rft.stitle%253DANN%2BINTERN%2BMED%26rft.aulast%253DGregg%26rft.auinit1%253DE.%2BW.%26rft.volume%253D138%26rft.issue%253D5%26rft.spage%253D383%26rft.epage%253D389%26rft.atitle%253DIntentional%2BWeight%2BLoss%2Band%2BDeath%2Bin%2BOverweight%2Band%2BObese%2BU.S.%2BAdults%2B35%2BYears%2Bof%2BAge%2Band%2BOlder%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.7326%252F0003-4819-138-5-200303040-00007%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F12614090%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/0003-4819-138-5-200303040-00007&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=12614090&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F6%2F4%2F121.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000181257300003&link_type=ISI
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".