Body Weight at Age Four Years and Readiness to Start School: A Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Adolescents with obesity have lower academic performance, but little is known about the association between body weight in early childhood and school readiness. The objective was to examine the association between age- and sex-standardized body mass index (zBMI) and body weight status and school readiness in young children. Methods: A prospective cohort study in Toronto, Canada, was conducted in young children enrolled in TARGet Kids!. Children's weight and height were measured before the start of kindergarten. Children's school readiness was measured by the Early Development Instrument (EDI), a validated teacher-completed instrument that assesses children's skills and behaviors in five developmental domains in kindergarten. Generalized estimating equations, adjusted for relevant confounders, were used in the analysis. Results: The study included 1015 children (1217 observations): 52% were male and mean age at zBMI was 4.2 years [50 months (SD 12.1)] and school readiness was 5.2 years [62.7 months (SD 6.9)]. There was no evidence found that zBMI was associated with school readiness. However, in a post hoc analysis, being classified as overweight or with obesity in kindergarten was associated with twofold higher odds of vulnerability in school readiness and a lower social competence score compared with their normal weight peers. Conclusions: Being classified as overweight or with obesity was associated with poor school readiness in year 2 of kindergarten. Early interventions to promote healthy growth before school entry may help promote development and school readiness in young children. www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01869530).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".