Obesity and healthy aging: social, functional and mental well-being among older Canadians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Canadians are living longer than before, and a large proportion of them are living with obesity. The present study sought to describe how older participants in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) who are living with obesity are aging, through an examination of measures of social, functional and mental well-being. METHODS: We used data from the first wave of the CLSA for people aged 55 to 85 years in this study. We used descriptive statistics to describe characteristics of this population and adjusted generalized logistic models to assess measures of social, functional and mental well-being among obese participants (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) relative to non-obese participants. Findings are presented separately for females and males. RESULTS: More than half of the participants reported living with a low personal income (less than $50 000); females were particularly affected. Less than half of the participants were obese; those who were had higher odds of multimorbidity than those who were not living with obesity (among those aged 55-64 years: odds ratio [OR] 2.7, 95% CI: 2.0-3.5 males; OR 2.8, 95% CI: 2.2-2.5 females). Low social participation was associated with obesity among older female participants, but not males. Physical functioning issues and impairments in activities of daily living were strongly associated with obesity for both females and males. While happiness and life satisfaction were not associated with obesity status, older females living with obesity reported negative impressions of whether their aging was healthy. CONCLUSION: The odds of multimorbidity were higher among participants who were obese, relative to those who were not. Obese female participants tended to have a negative perception of whether they were aging healthily and had lower odds of involvement in social activities, while both sexes reported impairments in functional health. The associations we observed, independent of multimorbidity in older age, highlight areas where healthy aging initiatives may be merited.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".