MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2263984867 · doi:10.3823/1767

Bullying, overweight and physical activity in school children of Karachi

2015· article· en· W2263984867 on OpenAlexaff
Musleh Uddin Kalar, Tashaba Qaiser Faizi, Maheen Jawed, Sumaira Khalil, Sara M Hussain, Mushkbar Fatima, Faiza Aslam, Hasnain Abbas Dharamshi, Tahira Naqvi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Archives of Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverweightMedicinePessimismObesityChildhood obesityNormal weightDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pessimistic community and emotional consequence of childhood obesity together with being liked to a less significant extent by peers, being rejected by peers, and being the victims of various structure of peer violence such as bullying are a major teenage dilemma. Bullying comprises of a variety of actions that result in a disparity of supremacy involving the assailant and the sufferer. Bullying was evaluated by Olweus Bullying Questionnaire (OBQ) and BMI was estimated by Childhood Obesity Working Group of the International Obesity Task Force. In response to the question how often you bullied at school in past couple of months 38.81% students replied once or twice, 9% students replied several times a week, 6.2% students replied once a week. BMI categories (Normal Weight/Overweight and Obese) was compared with the Olweus Bullying Questionnaire, I as hit, kicked, punched, thrown around the door on chi square test which showed statistically significant results (p=0.036). Bullying was significantly associated with obese school children. There should be proper knowledge and understanding of students regarding what bully actually is and report to their teachers and parents.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Archives of MedicineSame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207