MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003455339 · doi:10.1080/09540121.2020.1719279

Social media use as a predictor of higher body mass index in persons living with HIV

2020· article· en· W3003455339 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca Schnall, Tiffany Porras, Rita Musanti, Kimberly Adams Tufts, Elizabeth Sefcik, Mary Jane Hamilton, Carol Dawson-Rose, Carmen J. Portillo, J C Philips, Puangtip Chaiphibalsarisdi, Penelope M. Orton, Joseph Perazzo, Allison R. Webel

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Care · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of Nursing Research
KeywordsBody mass indexOverweightSocial mediaDemographyDescriptive statisticsMass mediaGerontologyMedicineObesityRegression analysisPsychologyAdvertisingSociologyStatisticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social media tools have been touted as an approach to bring more democratic communication to health care. We conducted a multi-site cross-sectional study among persons living with HIV (PLWH) to desrcibe technology use among PLWH in the US and the association between social media use and body-mass index (BMI). Our primary predictor variable was social media use. Our primary outcome was BMI measured through height and weight. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographic profiles of the study participants and linear regression models were used to analyze associations between the outcome and predictor variables controlling for demographic characteristics. Study participants (N = 606) across 6 study sites in the United States were predominately 50–74 years old (67%). Thirty-three percent of study participants had a normal weight (BMI 18.5–25), 33% were overweight (BMI 25–30), and 32% were obese (BMI > 30). Participants used several social media sites with Facebook (45.6%) predominating. Social media use was associated with higher BMI in study participants (p < .001) and this effect persisted, although not as strongly, when limiting the analysis to those who only those who used Facebook (p = .03). Further consideration of social factors that can be ameliorated to improve health outcomes is timely and needed.

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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.332 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDS CareSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207