MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289711348 · doi:10.1002/oby.23510

<scp>BMI</scp> trajectories, morbidity, and mortality in England: a two‐step approach to estimating consequences of changes in <scp>BMI</scp>

2022· article· en· W4289711348 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Laura A. Gray, Penny Breeze, Elizabeth A. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchool for Public Health ResearchMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchDepartment of Health and Social CareGovernment of the United KingdomUniversity College LondonNational Institute for Health and Care Excellence
KeywordsMedicineOverweightDemographyObesityBody mass indexHealth and Retirement StudyGerontologyStroke (engine)AsthmaHealth Survey for EnglandInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: BMI is known to have an association with morbidities and mortality. Many studies have argued that identifying health risks using single BMI measures has limitations, particularly in older adults, and that changes in BMI can help to identify risks. This study identifies distinct BMI trajectories and their association with the risks of a range of morbidities and mortality. METHODS: The English Longitudinal Study of Aging provides data on BMI, mortality, and morbidities between 1998 and 2015, sampled from adults over 50 years of age. This study uses a growth-mixture model and discrete-time survival analysis, combined using a two-step approach, which is novel in this setting, to the authors' knowledge. RESULTS: This study identified four trajectories: "stable overweight," "elevated BMI," "increasing BMI," and "decreasing BMI." No differences in mortality, cancer, or stroke risk were found between these trajectories. BMI trajectories were significantly associated with the risks of diabetes, asthma, arthritis, and heart problems. CONCLUSIONS: These results emphasize the importance of looking at change in BMI alongside most recent BMI; BMI trajectories should be considered where possible when assessing health risks. The results suggest that established BMI thresholds should not be used in isolation to identify health risks, particularly in older adults.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesitySame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207