MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Junk Food Consumption and its Association with Anthropometric Indices among undergraduates in Nigeria

2019· article· en· W2995822799 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nwogo Ajuka Obasi, Segun Solomon Ogundapo, E. Nweze, Stella Eberechukwu Obasi, Chinedu Ogbonnia Egwu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy and Nutrition Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJunk foodBody mass indexConsumption (sociology)ObesityAnthropometryWaistFood consumptionEnvironmental healthWaist–hip ratioMedicineBody fat percentageDemographyGerontologyInternal medicineSociologyAgricultural economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Junk foods consumption in institutions of higher learning has increasingly become an important part of students’ diet in Nigeria. This study was carried out to determine the pattern of junk food consumption among students in higher institutions of learning and the association between the junk food consumption and anthropometric indices measuring body weight status. A total of 900 students comprising 450 male and 450 female volunteers, aged 17 to 33 years were recruited from Akanu Ibiam Federal Polytechnic Unwana, Nigeria for the study. Seventy-nine percent of the students affirmed that the actually enjoy junk food. A total of 33.89% reported eating junk food everyday while 36.44% usually eat it at school during lunch with convenience been stated as the main reason for this consumption pattern by majority (48.44%). Low prevalence of obesity was observed i.e. 1.67% and 2.44% using body mass index (BMI) and waist-hip ratio (WHR), respectively, while majority of the volunteers i.e. 81.33% and 82.78% had normal BMI and WHR, respectively. There was no significant (P > 0.05) association between consumption of junk foods, frequency of consumption and body mass index or waist-hip ratio. This study revealed that there is no body weight status danger in junk food consumption pattern among the students. Thus, students may continue in their consumption pattern of this specified junk food if it is convenient and if it may enable them to meet up with their lined-up activities in the campus.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.338
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy and Nutrition SciencesSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207