Psychosocial Determinants of Weight Loss Among Young Adults With Overweight and Obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The ardent wish to lose weight, drive for thinness (DT), might be 1 psychosocial contributor to weight loss (WL) in adults with overweight and obesity. In examining DT as a predictor of WL, it is important to determine whether its predictive value is equal in males and females and whether it exerts its effects primarily through changes in diet or physical activity (PA). METHODS: Two-hundred three men and women with overweight and obesity (body mass index >25 kg/m; aged 21-35 years; 47% female) participated in this 12-month observational study. DT score and demographic information were collected at baseline. Participants were measured at quarterly intervals for objectively measured PA, energy intake, and anthropometrics. Linear mixed regression analyses determined whether DT predicted WL over time and whether these effects were moderated by sex. Followup mediation analyses determined whether the effects of DT on WL could be explained by either changes in diet or PA. RESULTS: Females reported higher DT as compared with males at baseline (P < .001). We observed a significant sex × time × DT interaction on WL (P < .04), such that higher DT predicted WL in males (P < .04), but not in females (P = .54). This effect of DT on WL in overweight and obese males was mediated by changes in PA (indirect effect, -0.43; 95% CI, -1.52 to -0.05), but not changes in energy intake. CONCLUSIONS: Among young adults with overweight and obesity who have higher DT, PA appears to be more important to WL than caloric restriction, particularly in males.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".