Dynamics between psychological distress and body mass index throughout adult life; evidence from 3 large cohort studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Associations between body mass index (BMI) and psychological distress (PD) have been reported; however, few longitudinal studies have accounted for likely life-course differences in BMI and PD stability, consistency, and their interplay across time. Via random intercepts cross-lagged panel models, we assessed the predictive effects (from BMI to PD or vice-versa) across the last two centuries in the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults [CARDIA, beginning in 1985-6] study using the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale [CES-D], and in the National Child Development Study [NCDS, beginning in 1958] and British Cohort Study [BCS, beginning in 1970] using the Malaise Inventory [MI]), assessed at least 4 times in adult life. In CARDIA (n = 4724), NCDS58 (n = 7149) and BCS70 (n = 5967), autoregressive effects were stronger for BMI than for PD, meaning that carry-over effects from one occasion to the next were larger for BMI than for PD. Small interindividual correlations between traits of higher BMI and higher PD were identified among females (rfemale<|0·2|) but not males (rmale<|0·03|) in CARDIA and NCDS. Cross-lagged effects were very weak or close to zero (standardized effects η<|0·1|). In the United States, depressive symptoms and BMI were positively correlated at the trait level among females. In the United Kingdom, relationships between PD and BMI were inconsistent between generations, with effect sizes of unlikely clinical importance, indicating negligible dominance of an intraindividual effect of BMI on PD or vice versa.
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 | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".