Mediating effects of dietary intake on associations of TV viewing, body mass index and metabolic syndrome in adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Objective Evidence suggests that TV viewing is associated with body mass index (BMI) and metabolic syndrome (MetS) in adolescents. However, it is unclear whether dietary intake mediates these relationships. Methods A cross‐sectional analysis was conducted in adolescents (12–19 years) participating in the 2003–2006 United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. BMI z scores (zBMI) (n = 3,161) and MetS (n = 1,379) were calculated using age‐ and sex‐specific criteria for adolescents. TV viewing (h/day) was measured via a self‐reported questionnaire, and dietary intake was assessed using two 24‐h recalls. Using the MacKinnon method, a series of mediation analyses were conducted examining five dietary mediators (total energy intake, fruit and vegetable intake, discretionary snacks, sugar‐sweetened beverages and diet quality) of the relationships between TV viewing and zBMI and MetS. Results Small positive relationships were observed between TV viewing and zBMI (β = 0.99, p < 0.001) and TV viewing and MetS (OR = 1.18, p = 0.046). No dietary element appeared to mediate the relationship between TV viewing and zBMI. However, sugar‐sweetened beverage consumption and fruit and vegetable intake partially mediated the relationship between TV viewing and MetS, explaining 8.7% and 4.1% of the relationship, respectively. Conclusions These findings highlight the complexity of the relationships between TV viewing, dietary intake and cardiometabolic health outcomes, and that TV viewing should remain a target for interventions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".