“I don't want them to think that what they said matters”: How treatment ‐ seeking adolescents with severe obesity cope with <scp>weight‐based</scp> victimization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescents with severe obesity are subject to a high prevalence of weight-based victimization that may lead to pervasive mental health symptoms. However, different coping strategies could potentially modulate these psychological consequences. This study aims to explore how treatment-seeking adolescents with severe obesity cope with weight-based victimization. This was a qualitative research study using an interpretive phenomenological analytic approach. One-on-one semi structured interviews were completed with 19 adolescents (63% female) enrolled in a weight management program. The interviews were transcribed and sequentially analysed until data saturation was attained. The majority of participants (89.5%) described being a victim of weight-based victimization and highlighted a significant emotional toll. Two key themes were identified that captured the various coping strategies used by participants. Over half (52.9%) described approach coping strategies where they acted on the source to invoke change by standing up for themselves, helping others in similar situations or becoming a bully themselves. Whilst the majority (94.1%) used avoidant coping strategies such as feigning a strong exterior façade, denial, isolation and self-harm. Nearly half (47.1%) used both strategies. Treatment-seeking adolescents with severe obesity commonly use avoidant coping strategies to deal with weight-based victimization. These strategies are associated with negative mental health outcomes and should be evaluated when counselling adolescents with obesity who have experienced weight-based victimization.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it