MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945314931 · doi:10.1002/ajhb.23253

Life course associations of height, weight, fatness, grip strength, and all‐cause mortality for high socioeconomic status Guatemalans

2019· article· en· W2945314931 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Liina Mansukoski, William Johnson, Katherine Brooke‐Wavell, J. Andres Galvez‐Sobral, Luis Furlán, Tim Cole, Barry Bogin

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Human Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilNIHR Leicester Biomedical Research CentreLoughborough UniversityMedical Research Council CanadaUniversity of LeicesterBill and Melinda Gates FoundationUniversity Hospitals of Leicester NHS TrustNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsBody mass indexDemographyMedicineSocioeconomic statusLife course approachLogistic regressionGrip strengthObesityGerontologyPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychologyEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to investigate the association between physical growth in preadult life with five outcomes at ages 64 to 76: weight, body mass index (BMI), estimated body fat percentage, hand grip strength, and mortality. METHODS: Super-imposition by translation and rotation (SITAR) growth curves of 40 484 Guatemalan individuals aged 3 to 19 years were modeled for the parameters of size, timing and intensity (peak growth velocity, eg, cm/year) of height, weight, BMI, and grip strength. Associations between the SITAR parameters and old age outcomes were tested using linear and binary logistic regression for a follow-up sample of high socioeconomic status (SES) Guatemalans, of whom 50 were aged 64 to 76 years at re-measurement and 45 died prior to the year 2017. RESULTS: SITAR models explained 69% to 98% of the variance in each outcome, with height the most precise. Individuals in the follow-up sample who had a higher BMI before the age of 20 years had higher estimated body fat (B = 1.4 CI -0.02-2.8) and BMI (B = 1.2, CI 0.2-2.2) at the ages of 64 to 76 years. Those who grew slower in height but faster in weight and BMI before the age of 20 years had higher BMI and body fat later in life. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the importance of a life course perspective on health and mortality risk. Childhood exposures leading to variation in preadult growth may be key to better understanding health and mortality risks in old age.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Human BiologySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207