Prevalence and Psychosocial Determinants of Body Mass Index in Adult Population within a National Community Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) and Economic Development and Cooperation Organization (OECD) has shown that the prevalence of obesity is increasing worldwide and has become a serious health problem. The Body Mass Index (BMI), which is a commonly used height-weight index to classify overweight and obesity, is calculated by dividing body weight by the square of height (kg/m²). Psychological factors and sociodemographic characteristics are supposed to affect BMI under current living conditions. The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between BMI, used in the classification of obesity, sociodemographic characteristics, and various psychological factors in adult. A total of 5,902 individuals (aged 39 and over) completed Sociodemographic Information Form, Body Mass Index Evaluation Form, and Experiences in Close Relationships Scale-Revised, Brief Symptom Inventory, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Positive and Negative Affect Scale, Personal Well-Being Index-Adult Form. Utilizing hierarchical regression analysis, obesity and overweight were associated with educational status, number of cigarettes, number of children, negative self in both genders. Obesity and overweight were also associated withpsychiatric distress, alexithymia, and avoidant attachment scores in men. Obesity and overweight were associatedalso with alcohol use, somatization, and positive affect score in women. The results of the study reveal the importance of understanding the factors affecting obesity and addresses the problems in a multidimensional way. However, more studies are needed to better understand the factors associated with obesity in Turkey.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".