Parental overweight/obesity, social factors, and child overweight/obesity at 7 years of age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study used gender-based analyses to examine whether child overweight/obesity is related to parental overweight/obesity and sociodemographic factors, in a representative population-based cohort of 7-year-old children. METHODS: Data from the Québec Longitudinal Study of Child Development 1998-2010 was used. Children (n= 1336) were randomly selected from each public health region of Québec. The study was based on face-to-face interviews and a set of questionnaires addressed to mothers and fathers. RESULTS: Compared to children with no overweight/obese parent, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of being overweight/obese with two overweight/obese parents was 5 for boys (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.31-10.85) and 5.87 for girls (95%CI: 2.63-13.12). Gender differences appeared when one parent was overweight/obese. For girls, having either an overweight/obese mother (OR, 3.10; 95%CI: 1.14-8.38) or father (OR, 3.64; 95%CI: 1.68-7.91) significantly increased the odds of being overweight/obese at 7 years. For boys, however, having only an overweight/obese father (OR, 2.05; 95%CI: 1.01-4.16) was related to overweight/obesity, but having only an overweight/obese mother was not related to overweight/obesity at 7 years for boys. In girls, but not in boys, having an immigrant mother also significantly related to overweight/obesity (OR, 2.71; 95%CI: 1.28-5.75) at 7 years, after controlling for other social factors. CONCLUSIONS: Gender differences in socialization may explain why at 7 years of age, girls' bodyweight is influenced by having even one overweight/obese parent (mother or father), while boys' bodyweight appears to be influenced only by father's overweight/obesity when only one parent is overweight/obese.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".