The paths to children’s disordered eating: The implications of BMI, weight-related victimization, body dissatisfaction and parents’ disordered eating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Being the target of peer victimization is frequent among children categorized as overweight and obese and is thought to play a central role in disordered eating behavior development. In accordance with a previous theoretical model, this cross-sectional study aimed to replicate among children the mediating role of weight-related victimization from peers and body dissatisfaction in the association between body mass index (BMI) and children's disordered eating attitudes and behaviors (CDEAB), while also taking into account the contribution of parents' disordered eating attitudes and behaviors (PDEAB). Methods: Participants were 874 children aged between 8 and 12 years old who were recruited in elementary schools. Height and weight were measured and used to calculate BMI. Self-reported questionnaires were used to measure weight-related victimization, body dissatisfaction, CDEAB and PDEAB. Results: For both girls and boys, a path analysis showed no direct effect of BMI on CDEAB, but a significant indirect effect was found, indicating that weight-related victimization and body dissatisfaction mediated this relationship. In addition, the indirect effect of weight-related victimization and body dissatisfaction remained significant even when controlling for PDEAB. Conclusion: While weight itself appears to be insufficient to explain CDEAB, weight-related victimization may lead children to see their weight as problematic and develop disordered attitudes and behaviors toward eating. This suggests that weight-related victimization from peers and body dissatisfaction must be taken seriously and that preventive and intervention efforts must be pursued.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".