Abstract P127: Early Life Adversity and Obesity Risk in Adolescence: A 9-year Population-Based Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: We previously found that exposure to adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) is associated adolescent obesity. This study was designed to identify mediators of this association. We hypothesized that exposure to adverse experiences before 9 yrs would be associated with an increased risk of obesity at 18 yrs, and that behavioural and emotional factors would mediate this association. Methods: In 2007/2008, 8568 nine-year-olds were randomly sampled, enrolled in the Growing up in Ireland cohort study and followed in 18 yrs. The main exposures were 14 adverse experiences including four of the traditional ACEs before 9 years of age, self-reported by the primary care giver. The main outcome, body mass index (BMI) was measured objectively at 18 yrs. Mediators were self-reported daily activity, soda intake, self-image (Piers Harris) and behavioural difficulties (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire) at 9 and 13 yrs. Co-variates were household income and primary caregiver BMI. Structural equation models (SEMs) tested for mediators of the association between exposure to adverse experiences and ACEs before 9 yrs and BMI at 18 yrs. Results: Among the 6039 adolescents with complete data, 76% experienced any adversity, 14% experienced an ACE, 49% were female and 27% were overweight/obese at 18 yrs. BMI Z score was higher at ages 9 (0.47 vs 0.36, p < 0.05) and 13 yrs ( 0.39 vs 0.29, p < 0.05) in those exposed to an adverse experience or an ACE, compared to those unexposed. Behavioural difficulties were higher and self image was lower at all three time points for those exposed to any adversity or an ACE, compared to those unexposed. SEMs revealed that behavioural difficulties and self concept, but not exercise or soda intake, modestly mediate the association between exposure to adverse experiences and BMI at 18 years (Figure 1). Conclusion: Exposure to any adversity or ACEs are not directly associated BMI at 18 yrs. Behavioural difficulties and self-concept weakly mediate the association between adverse childhood experiences and BMI at 18yrs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".