Treating Obesity in Latino Children: A Systematic Review of Current Interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Childhood obesity remains a significant public health issue in the U.S. and globally. Rates are disproportionately higher in Latinos than other ethnic groups. This review provides a qualitative synthesis of the current evidence for childhood obesity treatment interventions among Latino children. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar for articles published from September 2010 to December 2015. Randomized controlled trials treating childhood overweight/obesity in Latino children ages 5-19 focused on diet and/or physical activity (PA) behaviors were included. Of the records initially identified (n=1,592), 11 studies met the inclusionary criteria. The majority included a family-based component (n=8; 73%). Nearly half (n=5) focused on children ages 5-12, with three specifically developed for the pre-adolescence stage (ages 8-12). Nine studies acknowledged cultural tailoring, most frequently by seeking input from their intended population and utilizing bilingual delivery staff. Improvements in anthropometric measures (e.g. body mass index (BMI) z-score) were observed in 55% of the studies (n=6). Many interventions with a combined focus of diet and PA, in the form of nutrition education in a group setting and in-person activity/exercise sessions and incorporated a parent/family component reported positive anthropometric results. Three (27%) studies included a follow-up period, all of which observed a sustained decrease in BMI over time. Overall, family-based interventions focusing on both diet and PA demonstrated promising results. However, additional research incorporating a follow-up period is warranted to assess sustainability of these outcomes. Additionally, more interventions could be developed specifically for the critical developmental stage of pre-adolescence
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".