Associations of timing of food intake with energy intake, eating behaviour traits and psychosocial factors in adults with overweight and obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Whether a late distribution of food intake impacts obesity through increased energy intake remains uncertain and the behavioural characterization of late eating needs to be further investigated. The first objective of this study was to assess the associations between late eating and body mass index (BMI) and total energy intake (TEI), and whether TEI mediates the association between late eating and BMI. The second objective was to assess the associations between late eating and eating behaviour traits or psychosocial factors and whether eating behaviour traits mediate the association between late eating and TEI. Methods Baseline data from 301 individuals (56% women, age = 38.7 ± 8.5 years; BMI = 33.2 ± 3.4 kg/m 2 ), who participated in four weight loss studies were used in this cross-sectional study. Total energy intake was assessed using a three-day food record from which the percentage of TEI after 17:00 and after 20:00 was calculated. Eating behaviour traits and psychosocial factors were assessed with questionnaires. Pearson correlations and mediation analyses adjusted for age, sex, underreporting of energy intake, sleep duration and bedtime were performed. Results Percent TEI after 17:00 and after 20:00 were associated with TEI ( r = 0.13, p = 0.03 for both), and TEI mediated the association between percent TEI after 17:00 and BMI ( β = 0.01 ± 0.01, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.02). Percent TEI after 17:00 was associated with disinhibition ( r = 0.13, p = 0.03) and percent TEI after 20:00 was associated with susceptibility to hunger ( r = 0.13, p = 0.03), stress ( r = 0.24, p = 0.002) and anxiety ( r = 0.28, p = 0.0004). In women, disinhibition mediated the association between percent TEI after 17:00 and TEI ( β = 3.41 ± 1.43, 95% CI: 0.92, 6.47). Susceptibility to hunger mediated the association between percent TEI after 20:00 and TEI ( β = 0.96 ± 0.59, 95% CI: 0.02, 2.34) in men and women. Conclusion Late eating is associated with TEI and suboptimal eating behaviours which could contribute to explaining the association between timing of food intake and 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".