MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213252425 · doi:10.3934/publichealth.2022004

Mapping changes in the obesity stigma discourse through Obesity Canada: a content analysis

2021· article· en· W3213252425 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sara Kirk, Mary Forhan, Joshua Yusuf, Ashly Chance, Kathleen G. Burke, Nicole Blinn, Stephanie Quirke, Ximena Ramos Salas, Angela S. Alberga, Shelly Russell‐Mayhew

Bibliographic record

VenueAIMS Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryConcordia UniversityUniversity of AlbertaDalhousie University
FundersObesity Canada
KeywordsObesityStigma (botany)TerminologyFraming (construction)PsychologyEnglish languageDocumentationMedicineGerontologySocial psychologyGeographyPsychiatryPathologyComputer scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Stigmatization of persons living with obesity is an important public health issue. In 2015, Obesity Canada adopted person-first language in all internal documentation produced by the organization, and, from 2017, required all authors to use person-first language in abstract submissions to Obesity Canada hosted conferences. The impact of this intentional shift in strategic focus is not known. Therefore, the aim of this study was to conduct a content analysis of proceedings at conferences hosted by Obesity Canada to identify whether or how constructs related to weight bias and obesity stigma have changed over time. METHODS: Of 1790 abstracts accepted to conferences between 2008-2019, we excluded 353 abstracts that featured animal or cellular models, leaving 1437 abstracts that were reviewed for the presence of five constructs of interest and if they changed over time: 1) use of person-first versus use of disease-first terminology, 2) incorporation of lived experience of obesity, 3) weight bias and stigma, 4) aggressive or alarmist framing and 5) obesity framed as a modifiable risk factor versus as a disease. We calculated and analyzed through linear regression: 1) the overall frequency of use of each construct over time as a proportion of the total number of abstracts reviewed, and 2) the ratio of abstracts where the construct appeared at least once based on the total number of abstracts. RESULTS: We found a significant positive correlation between use of person-first language in abstracts and time (R2 = 0.51, p < 0.01 for frequency, R2 = 0.65, p < 0.05 for ratio) and a corresponding negative correlation for the use of disease-first terminology (R2 = 0.48, p = 0.01 for frequency, R2 = 0.75, p < 0.001 for ratio). There was a significant positive correlation between mentions of weight bias and time (R2 = 0.53 and 0.57, p < 0.01 for frequency and ratio respectively). CONCLUSION: Use of person-first language and attention to weight bias increased, while disease-first terminology decreased in accepted abstracts over the past 11 years since Obesity Canada began hosting conferences and particularly since more explicit actions for expectations to use person-first language were put in place in 2015 and 2017.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.281
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIMS Public HealthSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207