The Edmonton Obesity Staging System for Pediatrics: A proposed clinical staging system for paediatric obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionally, clinical recommendations for assessing and managing paediatric obesity have relied on anthropometric measures, such as body mass index (BMI), BMI percentile and/or BMI z-score, to monitor health risks and determine weight management success. However, anthropometric measures do not always accurately and reliably identify children and youth with obesity-related health risks or comorbidities. The authors propose a new clinical staging system (the Edmonton Obesity Staging System for Pediatrics, EOSS-P), adapted from the adult-oriented EOSS. The EOSS-P is used to stratify patients according to severity of obesity-related comorbidities and barriers to weight management into four graded categories (0 to 3) within four main health domains: metabolic, mechanical, mental health and social milieu (the 4Ms). The EOSS-P is based on common clinical assessments that are widely available and routinely completed by clinicians, and has the potential to provide clinical and prognostic information to help evaluate and inform the management of paediatric obesity.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".