Relationship Between Body Mass Index and Obesity Awareness in School Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The primary aim was to assess the prevalence of overweight and obesity among the participants and its relationship to obesity awareness. METHODS: A cross-sectional study that included intermediate and high schools students was conducted between April 2014 and June 2015. Anthropometric measurements were obtained by the researchers and body mass index (BMI) was calculated. We used the obesity risk knowledge (ORK-10) scale to assess obesity awareness. Participants who answered ≥ 5 out of 10 questions correctly were considered to be aware. RESULT: , and 27.6% were either overweight or obese. The mean ORK-10 score was 3.15 and 25.4% were considered to be aware. Compared to those who were non-aware, participants in the aware group were more likely to be older (P < 0.001), male (P < 0.001), attend high school (P < 0.001), eat dinner with their families (P = 0.021), eat fruit at least daily (P = 0.027), and consider obesity to be a disease (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Only 25.4% of students who participated were considered to be aware about obesity. Those who were aware were more likely to be older male high school students.
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 | 0.019 | 0.065 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| 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".