Sex differences in weight perception and weight gain among Black college students in the USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to examine the prevalence of overweight/obesity and to explore sex differences in body weight perceptions and correlates of weight gain among Black students at 2 historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) in the USA. METHODS: Participants completed a paper-based survey, and their height and weight were measured (67% completion rate). RESULTS: The overweight and obesity rates were 33.8% and 26.9%, respectively. More females than males accurately assessed their weight (p < 0.05). Body weight underestimation was associated with male sex, excellent/very good perceived overall health, and not being informed by a doctor of having overweight or obesity (p < 0.01). Higher odds of ≥5% weight gain were related to female sex, living on campus, and not being informed by a doctor of having overweight or obesity (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Given the high overweight and obesity rates among Black students, HBCUs in the USA should develop intervention strategies for the prevention and management of overweight and obesity. College health educators at HBCUs need to provide regular check-ups or health screenings that help male students perceive their weight accurately and prevent weight underestimation. It is important for HBCUs to monitor and address weight gain among Black students as early as possible.
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 | 0.015 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".