MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095094012 · doi:10.2196/24968

Long-Term Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Trial to Reduce Excessive Weight Gain in Infancy: Protocol for the Prevention of Overweight in Infancy (POI) Follow-Up Study at 11 Years

2020· article· en· W3095094012 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Taiwo O Adebowale, Barry Taylor, Andrew Gray, Barbara C. Galland, Anne‐Louise M. Heath, Sarah Fortune, Kim Meredith‐Jones, Trudy Sullivan, Deborah McIntosh, Bradley Brosnan

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverweightMedicineRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Screen timeBreastfeedingPhysical therapyAnthropometryObesityMental healthPediatricsGerontologyPsychiatryPhysical activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Prevention of Overweight in Infancy (POI) randomized controlled trial assessed the effect of a more conventional food, physical activity, and breastfeeding intervention, with a more novel sleep intervention on weight outcomes at 2 years of age. The trial had 58% uptake at recruitment, and retention was 86% at age 2 years, 77% at age 3.5 years, and 69% at age 5 years. Children who received the brief sleep intervention in infancy had just half the risk of obesity at 2 years of age compared to those who did not receive the sleep intervention. Importantly, this substantially reduced risk was still apparent at our follow-up at 5 years of age. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this follow-up at age 11 years is to determine whether differences in BMI z-score and obesity risk remain apparent now that it is at least 9 years since cessation of the sleep intervention. Several secondary outcomes of interest will also be examined including 24-hour movement patterns, mental health and wellbeing, and use of electronic media, particularly prior to sleep. METHODS: We will seek renewed consent from all 734 of the original 802 POI families who expressed interest in further involvement. Children and parent(s) will attend 2 clinics and 1 home appointment to obtain measures of anthropometry and body composition (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scan), 24-hour movement patterns (sleep, sedentary time, and physical activity measured using an AX3 accelerometer), mental health and wellbeing (validated questionnaires), family functioning (validated questionnaires), use of electronic media (wearable and stationary cameras, questionnaires), and diet and eating behaviors (24-hour recall, questionnaires). RESULTS: This follow-up study has full ethical approval from the University of Otago Human Ethics Committee (H19/109) and was funded in May 2019 by the Health Research Council of New Zealand (grant 19/346). Data collection commenced in June 2020, and first results are expected to be submitted for publication in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes of early obesity intervention are rare. Despite the growing body of evidence linking insufficient sleep with an increased risk of obesity in children, interventions targeting improvements in sleep have been insufficiently explored. Our initial follow-up at 5 years of age suggested that an early sleep intervention may have long-term benefits for effective weight management in children. Further analysis in our now preteen population will provide much-needed evidence regarding the long-term effectiveness of sleep interventions in infancy as an obesity prevention approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00892983; https://tinyurl.com/y3xepvxf. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/24968.

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.007

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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 venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207