The Skin We Live in: Pigmentation Traits and Tanning Behaviour in British Young Adults, an Observational and Genetically-Informed Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skin cancer incidence has been increasing worldwide, representing a particularly high burden for populations of European ancestry. Outdoor and indoor tanning using ultraviolet (UV) radiation devices are major risk factors for skin cancer. While tanning behaviours can be modified by targeted interventions to reduce skin cancer rates, there is insufficient evidence on the motivations for tanning preferences and their relationship with pigmentation phenotypes. The present observational and genetically-informed study investigates motives for tanning and the role that pigmentation phenotypes play on outdoor and indoor tanning behaviour in British young adults. This study included 3722 participants from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children in South West England, with data on pigmentation features, tanning ability and preferences, and SNP genotypes. Liking to tan and outdoor tanning were strongly influenced by pigmentary traits and tanning ability. However, the association of these phenotypes with UV indoor tanning was weaker. Our results provide evidence to support the implementation of skin cancer preventative interventions that consider individual biological characteristics and motives for undergoing outdoor and indoor tanning.
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 | 0.000 | 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".