Association of Psychobehavioral Variables With HOMA-IR and BMI Differs for Men and Women With Prediabetes in the PREVIEW Lifestyle Intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<b>Objective:</b> Stress, sleep, eating behavior and physical activity are associated with weight change and insulin resistance. The aim of the analysis was the assessment of the overall and sex specific association of psychobehavioral variables throughout the 3-y PREVIEW intervention using the Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), BMI, and length of time in the study.<b></b> <p><b>Methods</b>: Associations of psychobehavioral variables, including stress, mood, eating behavior physical activity (PA), and sleep with BMI, HOMA-IR and time spent in study were assessed in 2184 participants with pre-diabetes and overweight/ obesity (n=706 men; n=1478 women) during a 3-year lifestyle intervention utilizing linear mixed modelling and general linear modelling.The study was a randomized multicenter trial using a 2x2 diet-by- PA design.</p> <p><b>Results: </b>Overall,<b> </b>cognitive restraint and PA increased during the intervention compared to baseline, while BMI, HOMA-IR, disinhibition, hunger and sleepiness decreased (all p<0.05). Cognitive restraint and PA were negatively, while disinhibition, hunger, stress, total mood-disturbance were positively associated with both BMI and HOMA-IR. Sleep-duration, low sleep quality, total mood-disturbance, disinhibition and hunger scores were positively associated with HOMA-IR for men only. Drop-outs at 6 months had higher stress and total mood-disturbance scores at baseline and throughout their time spent in the study compared to study completers.</p> <p><b>Conclusion: </b>Eating behavior and PA, control of<b> </b>stress, mood-disturbance and sleep characteristics were associated with BMI, HOMA-IR and time spent in study with different effects in men and women during the PREVIEW-lifestyle intervention-study.<b> </b></p>
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 | 0.001 | 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".