Parents’ integration in the treatment of adolescents with obesity: A qualitative study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Obesity during adolescence is particularly challenging. Our aims were to identify parents' and adolescents' perceptions regarding obesity, as well as family dynamics before and after family-based behavioral therapy (FBBT) to improve obesity. METHOD: Using a qualitative approach, 23 parents and 21 adolescents aged 12 to 18 years participated in 6 focus groups, before and after FBBT. Focus groups were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: Transcript analyses suggested 3 major themes from both adolescents and parents: obesity as a source of strong negative emotions, adolescents and weight-control responsibility, and disruption in family dynamics. FBBT improved self-confidence and family functioning, allowing for behavioral changes. Both adolescents and their parents felt empowered. DISCUSSION: Family dynamics are an important issue in weight-loss treatment during adolescence. Including both parents and adolescents in therapy is crucial for tackling obesity and addressing health needs related to this age group. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".