MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136451931 · doi:10.1186/1478-7954-11-21

Comparing life expectancy and health-adjusted life expectancy by body mass index category in adult Canadians: a descriptive study

2013· article· en· W2136451931 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Colin Steensma, Lidia Loukine, Heather Orpana, Ernest Lo, Bernard C. K. Choi, Chris Waters, Sylvie Martel

Bibliographic record

VenuePopulation Health Metrics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMedicineLife expectancyUnderweightOverweightBody mass indexDemographyPopulation healthGerontologyObesityPopulationPublic healthQuality of life (healthcare)Environmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While many studies have examined differences between body mass index (BMI) categories in terms of mortality risk and health-related quality of life (HRQL), little is known about the effect of body weight on health expectancy. We examined life expectancy (LE), health-adjusted life expectancy (HALE), and proportion of LE spent in nonoptimal (or poor) health by BMI category for the Canadian adult population (age ≥ 20). METHODS: Respondents to the National Population Health Survey (NPHS) were followed for mortality outcomes from 1994 to 2009. Our study population at baseline (n=12,478) was 20 to 100 years old with an average age of 47. LE was produced by building abridged life tables by sex and BMI category using data from the NPHS and the Canadian Chronic Disease Surveillance System. HALE was estimated using the Health Utilities Index from the Canadian Community Health Survey as a measure of HRQL. The contribution of HRQL to loss of healthy life years for each BMI category was also assessed using two methods: by calculating differences between LE and HALE proportional to LE and by using a decomposition technique to separate out mortality and HRQL contributions to loss of HALE. RESULTS: At age 20, for both sexes, LE is significantly lower in the underweight and obesity class 2+ categories, but significantly higher in the overweight category when compared to normal weight (obesity class 1 was nonsignificant). HALE at age 20 follows these same associations and is significantly lower for class 1 obesity in women. Proportion of life spent in nonoptimal health and decomposition of HALE demonstrate progressively higher losses of healthy life associated with lowered HRQL for BMI categories in excess of normal weight. CONCLUSIONS: Although being in the overweight category for adults may be associated with a gain in life expectancy as compared to normal weight adults, overweight individuals also experience a higher proportion of these years of life in poorer health. Due to the descriptive nature of this study, further research is needed to explore the causal mechanisms which explain these results, including the important differences we observed between sexes and within obesity subcategories.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations24
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePopulation Health MetricsSame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207