Weight Status Change in Chinese American Children over a Ten-Year Period: Retrospective Study of a Primary Care Pediatric Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Weight change from childhood to adolescence has been understudied in Asian Americans. Known studies lack disaggregation by Asian subgroups. This retrospective study assessed the weight status change in 1500 Chinese American children aged 5−11 years from an urban primary care health center between 2007 and 2017. Weight status was categorized using the 2000 CDC growth charts into “underweight/normal weight” and “overweight/obese.” The overweight/obesity prevalence in 2007 and 2017 were determined. McNemar’s test and logistic regression were performed. The prevalence of overweight/obesity decreased from 29.9% in 2007 to 18.6% in 2017. Children who were overweight/obese at 5−11 years had 10.3 increased odds of staying overweight/obese over time (95% CI = 7.6−14.0, p < 0.001) compared to their underweight/normal weight counterparts. Of the children who were overweight/obese in 2007, 45.7% remained overweight/obese ten years later. Childhood overweight/obesity strongly predicts adult overweight/obesity in Chinese Americans. Targeted education and intervention are warranted to prevent adult obesity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".