Water intake and intra-meal fluid consumption in relation to general and abdominal obesity of Iranian adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to examine the association between whole-day water intake and intra-meal fluid consumption and odds of general and abdominal obesity among adults. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted among 7958 adults in Isfahan, Iran. Daily water consumption was assessed through the use of a pre-tested questionnaire by asking questions about the average number of glasses of water consumed in a day. Intra-meal fluid consumption was also analysed. Data regarding height, weight and waist circumference were collected using a validated self-administered questionnaire. Obesity was defined as body mass index ≥30 kg/m 2 , and abdominal obesity was defined as waist circumference >88 cm for women and >102 cm for men. Results After taking potential confounders into account, individuals who were taking more than eight glasses of water in a day had 78% greater odds of general obesity (OR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.08–2.94) compared with those who were taking less than two glasses of water. Individuals with much water intake had no significant greater odds of abdominal obesity. Compared with those who were consuming less than a glass of intra-meal fluids, subjects with 1–2 glasses of fluids between meals had 34% greater odds of general obesity (OR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.04–1.59). Although subjects with greater intra-meal fluid intake had greater odds of abdominal obesity in crude model, this association became non-significant after adjustment for potential confounders (comparing > 4 glasses vs. ≤1 glass: OR: 1.65; 95% CI: 0.81–3.34). Conclusions We observed that taking more than eight glasses of water in a day and consuming 1–2 glasses of fluids between meals was associated with greater odds of general obesity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".