MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2191219029 · doi:10.24095/hpcdp.30.1.06

Association of obesity with mood and anxiety disorders in the adult general population

2009· article· en· W2191219029 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tahany M. Gadalla

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic diseases and injuries in Canada · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Lifestyle Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyAssociation (psychology)ObesityMoodMood disordersClinical psychologyMedicinePopulationPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity is a major health concern. It has been implicated as a risk factor for several physical illnesses, functional limitations and poor quality of life. However, while the physical consequences of obesity are well established, the relationship between obesity and mental health is still unclear. This study used data collected in the Canadian Community Health Survey, cycle 3.1 (2005) to examine this relationship in adults 20 to 64 years old. Obesity was significantly associated with mood disorders, but not with anxiety disorders. When adjusting for sex, place of birth, smoking, and functional limitations, all of which were significantly associated with obesity, the odds of obesity remained significantly higher in persons with mood disorders (with or without anxiety disorders). It is still unclear whether the relationship between obesity and depression is causal, and if so, whether obesity causes depression or depression causes obesity. Implications for health care providers and suggestions for future research are discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations48
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChronic diseases and injuries in CanadaSame topicHealth and Lifestyle StudiesFrench-language works237,207