Physicians’ Attitude Toward Identification and Management of Childhood Obesity in Israel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity is a serious health problem, and is becoming increasingly common in affluent societies. In 1998, an Expert Committee published guidelines regarding obesity evaluation and treatment. The purpose of this study was to assess the attitude of primary care physicians in Israel toward diagnosis and treatment of childhood obesity, as related to the recommended guidelines. Primary physicians caring for children and adolescents were asked to complete an anonymous questionnaire including personal and professional details, methods of diagnosis, documentation and treatment of childhood obesity, and familiarity with and implementation of the Expert Committee recommendations. One hundred forty-four physicians, treating approximately 100,000 children monthly, completed the questionnaire. Ninety-four percent were considered to have diagnosed obesity properly. Furthermore, only 19% reported weighing all children examined, while 99% of the physicians suggested some treatment for obesity. The most frequent recommendations for managing obesity were referral to a dietitian (92%), physical exercise (85%), and group treatment (27%). The majority of physicians (78%) were not familiar with the new Expert Committee recommendations regarding obesity treatment. This study suggests that the majority of primary physicians diagnose obesity properly and recommend accepted modalities to manage obesity. A comprehensive program to prevent and treat obesity is recommended to improve the health status of the population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".