MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2345600628 · doi:10.1002/osp4.35

Differences in weight change trajectory patterns in a publicly funded adult weight management centre

2016· article· en· W2345600628 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Science & Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHamilton Medical Research GroupYork University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchYork University
KeywordsMedicineWeight managementWeight changeWeight lossBody weightDemographyWeight gainObesityAnimal scienceInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe differences in weight loss (WL) trajectory patterns at a publicly funded clinical weight management centre. METHODS: Groups with differences in the attainment of a 5% total body WL and percentage WL patterns over time were identified in 7,121 patients who attended a physician lead multi-disciplinary clinical lifestyle weight management that predominantly focused on education and diet counselling. Resultant health differences were examined. RESULTS: Patients had 3.2 ± 6.3%WL with 35% of patients achieving and maintaining a 5%WL. Half of these patients achieved the 5%WL within 6 months, while the other half had a more gradual approach. Another 10% achieved 5%WL, but regained weight after 6 months. There were seven distinct WL patterns identified: LargeWL (Mean WL: 21.2 ± 8.1%; Probability of group membership (PGM): 2.4%), ModerateWL (15.1 ± 5.1%WL; 5.4%PGM), SlowWL (6.7 ± 3.2%WL; 20.1%PGM) and MinimalWL (2.4 ± 2.2%WL; 34.6%PGM), WL Regain (9.4 ± 3.5%WL; 8.2%PGM), Weight Stable (1.2 ± 3.2%WL; 28.5%PGM) and Weight Gain (18.4 ± 11.2%WG; 0.8%PGM) groups. Improvements in blood pressure, lipids and glucose were generally related to the magnitude of WL achieved more than the pattern or speed of WL. CONCLUSIONS: There are large differences in the absolute WL attained and the pattern of WL during a publicly funded weight management program. Changes in clinical health markers appear to be more strongly related with the absolute WL attained as opposed to patterns of weight change. © 2016 The Authors. Obesity Science & Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd, World Obesity and The Obesity Society.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.243 · 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