Fat Mass Development From Childhood And Adolescence To Young Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that adult obesity has its antecedents in childhood. PURPOSE Evaluate childhood and adolescent development of total body fat (TBF), percent body fat (%BF), and body mass index (BMI) in young adults who were continually assessed in childhood. METHODS Subjects were part of the Saskatchewan Pediatric Bone Mineral Accrual Study (PBMAS) (1991–1997; 2002–2005). 65 males and 83 females (between ages 8–15 years at study entry; 1991) make up the present sample. Height and weight were measured bi-annually during childhood/adolescence, annually in adulthood, and BMI was calculated. Age at peak height velocity (PHV) was calculated for each participant and data was aligned by this common maturational point, to control for maturity differences between subjects. Total body dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), was performed annually (for TBF and %BF). In adulthood subjects were categorized as normal weight (BMI<25kg/m2) or overweight (BMI>25kg/m2). RESULTS Independent t-tests indicated that overweight adult males and females had significantly (p<0.05) greater TBF and %BF than their normal weight counterparts, at most biological ages (years from PHV). Both overweight males and females had significantly greater BMI than those of normal adult weight. CONCLUSIONS As early as childhood and adolescence, young adult males and females categorized as overweight had greater fat mass than their normal weight counterparts.
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 | 0.001 | 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".