Are rural South African children abdominally obese?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: While available data exist on total body fat of rural South African children, as measured by body mass index, little is known concerning the abdominal obesity of rural South African children. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of abdominal obesity among rural South African children. Methods : Participants involved 1 172 rural black school children (541 boys and 631 girls) aged 10-16 years, residing in Mankweng and Toronto, both rural black settlements in Capricorn district, Limpopo province, South Africa. Height, weight and waist circumference were measured using standard techniques. Waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) was calculated. A WHtR ≤ 0.50 was used to determine abdominal obesity. Results were analysed using student t-test and Chi-squared statistics, with a p-value of < 0.05. Results : Waist-to-height ratio showed inconsistent results in both sexes and across age groups, with no significant differences among boys and girls in all age groups. The proportion of boys with a WHtR ≥ 0.5 was 69 (12.8%), while girls were 92 (14.6%). The highest proportion of WHtR occurs at age 11 in boys, while this proportionality increases with age in girls, peaking at ages 14-16 years. Overall, 161 (13.7%) children had central obesity. Conclusions : This study indicates that abdominal obesity as measured by WHtR is prevalent among rural black South African children. The prevalence of WHtR ≥ 0.5 (13.7%) among the children is worrisome, as its signals the presence of obesity-related problems and the likely susceptibility of these sample children to future health risks. Therefore, interventions strategies are needed to reduce central obesity among children.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".