Sexual Minority Stressors, Internalizing Symptoms, and Unhealthy Eating Behaviors in Sexual Minority Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sexual minorities are more likely than heterosexuals to engage in unhealthy eating behaviors. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to examine sexual minority stressors and internalizing symptoms as predictors of unhealthy eating behaviors among sexual minority youths. METHODS: We used longitudinal data from 1461 sexual minority youths in the Growing Up Today Study, across ages 14-28 years. We hypothesized that sexual minority stressors would predict unhealthy eating behaviors, in part due to internalizing symptoms. Linear regression models fit via generalized estimating equations were stratified by gender and sexual orientation. RESULTS: Significant positive and inverse associations between stressors and eating behaviors were detected among females and males, with more significant associations among females. Associations were attenuated by up to 71 % for females and 12 % for males when internalizing symptoms were added to the models. CONCLUSIONS: Sexual minority stressors predicted unhealthy eating behaviors overall and more so for some sexual orientation and gender groups; associations were partially explained by internalizing symptoms. The conceptual model appears to best describe the experiences of bisexual females. Findings have clinical implications for adolescent health.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".