Clustering of risk-related modifiable behaviours and their association with overweight and obesity among a large sample of youth in the COMPASS study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Canadian youth exhibit a number of risky behaviours, some of which are associated with overweight and obesity. The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of 15 modifiable risk behaviours in a large sample of Canadian youth, to identify underlying subgroups based on patterns of health behaviours, and to examine the association between identified subgroups and overweight/obesity. METHODS: Data from 18,587 grades 9-12 students in Year 1 (2012-13) of the COMPASS study and latent class analysis were used to identify patterns and clustering among 15 health behaviours (e.g., physical inactivity, sedentary behaviour, unhealthy eating, substance use). A logistic regression model examined the associations between these clusters and overweight/obesity status. RESULTS: Four distinct classes were identified: traditional school athletes, inactive screenagers, health conscious, and moderately active substance users. Each behavioural cluster demonstrated a distinct pattern of behaviours, some with a greater number of risk factors than others. Traditional school athletes (odds ratio (OR) 1.15, 95% CI 1.03-1.29), inactive screenagers (OR 1.33; 1.19-1.48), and moderately active substance users (OR 1.27; 1.14-1.43) were all significantly more likely to be overweight/obese compared to the health conscious group. CONCLUSIONS: Four distinct subpopulations of youth were identified based on their patterns of health and risk behaviours. The three clusters demonstrating poorer health behaviour were all at an increased risk of being overweight/obese compared to their somewhat healthier peers. Obesity-related public health interventions and health promotion efforts might be more effective if consideration is given to population segments with certain behavioural patterns, targeting subgroups at greatest risk of overweight or obesity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".