MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2255134141 · doi:10.3390/ijerph13020151

Fat Mass Centile Charts for Brazilian Children and Adolescents and the Identification of the Roles of Socioeconomic Status and Physical Fitness on Fat Mass Development

2016· article· en· W2255134141 on OpenAlexaff
Simonete Silva, Adam Baxter‐Jones, José Maia

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsPercentileAnthropometrySocioeconomic statusDemographyBody mass indexMultilevel modelGerontologyPhysical fitnessFat massMedicinePsychologyEnvironmental healthStatisticsPhysical therapyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents fat mass centile charts for Brazilian youth and investigates the roles of socioeconomic status and physical fitness (PF) on fat mass (FM) development. Two northeast Brazilian samples were used: a cross-sectional sample of 3659 (1921 girls) aged 8 to 16 years and a mixed-longitudinal series of cohorts (8-10, 10-12, 12-14, 14-16 years) with 250 boys and 250 girls. A measure of somatic maturity was used as a marker of biological maturation; PF comprised agility, explosive and static strength, and aerobic capacity. Socioeconomic status was based on school attended; public or private. Slaughter's anthropometric equations were used to estimate FM. Percentile charts was constructed using the LMS method. HLM (Hierarchical Linear Model) 7 software modeled FM changes, identifying inter-individual differences and their covariates. Girls and boys had different FM percentile values at each age; FM increased nonlinearly in both girls and boys. Higher PF levels reduced FM changes across time in both sexes. Sex-specific non-linear FM references were provided representing important tools for nutritionists, pediatriciann and educators. Physical fitness levels were found to act as a protective factor in FM increases. As such, we emphasize PF importance as a putative health marker and highlight the need for its systematic development across the school years.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health→Same topicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet→French-language works237,207→