Overweight and obesity prevalence among Cree youth of Eeyou Istchee according to three body mass index classification systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about the suitability of three commonly used body mass index (BMI) classification systems for Indigenous youth. We estimated overweight and obesity prevalence among Cree youth of Eeyou Istchee according to three BMI classification systems, assessed the level of agreement between them, and evaluated their accuracy through body fat and cardiometabolic risk factors. Data on 288 youth (aged 8–17 years) were collected. Overweight and obesity prevalence were estimated with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), International Obesity Task Force (IOTF) and World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. Agreement was measured with weighted kappa (κw). Associations with body fat and cardiometabolic risk factors were evaluated by analysis of variance. Obesity prevalence was 42.7% with IOTF, 47.2% with CDC, and 49.3% with WHO criteria. Agreement was almost perfect between IOTF and CDC (κw = 0.93), IOTF and WHO (κw = 0.91), and WHO and CDC (κw = 0.94). Means of body fat and cardiometabolic risk factors were significantly higher (P trend < 0.001) from normal weight to obesity, regardless of the system used. Youth considered overweight by IOTF but obese by CDC or WHO exhibited less severe clinical obesity. IOTF seems to be more accurate in identifying obesity in Cree youth.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".