Lifestyle habits and obesity progression in overweight and obese American young adults: Lessons for promoting cardiometabolic health: Lifestyle habits and obesity progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity among young adults is a growing problem in the United States and is related to unhealthy lifestyle habits such as high caloric intake and inadequate exercise. Accurate assessment of lifestyle habits across obesity stages is important for informing age-specific intervention strategies to prevent and reduce obesity progression. Using a modified version of the Edmonton Obesity Staging System (mEOSS), a new scale for defining obesity risk and predicting obesity morbidity and mortality, this cross sectional study assessed prevalence of mEOSS in 105 overweight/obese young adults and compared young adults’ lifestyle habits across the mEOSS stages. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) were performed. About 80% of participants (n=83) fell into the mEOSS-2 group and had obesity-related chronic disorders such as diabetes, hypertension and/or dyslipidemia. There were significant differences in dietary quality and dietary patterns across the mEOSS stages. Findings highlighted the significance of obesity prevention and early treatment for overweight and obese young adults to prevent/stop obesity progression.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".