Loneliness during COVID-19 and its association with eating habits and 24-hour movement behaviours in a sample of Canadian adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Loneliness, a feeling of distress, has aggravated due to the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns and reduced social interactions. The objective of this study was to explore whether increased loneliness due to the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with various health behaviours in adolescence, a critical period for the development of lasting lifestyle habits. We used self-reported data from 40,521 Canadian adolescents aged 12-19 years (collected between November 2020 and June 2021) for this cross-sectional study. Logistic regression was used to predict the odds of skipping breakfast and not meeting movement behaviour guidelines [moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (≥60 min/day), recreational screen time (≤2 h/day), sleep duration (≥8 h/day)] among adolescents with increased loneliness due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We found higher odds of skipping breakfast [boys: OR 1.40 (95% CI: 1.32, 1.49), girls: OR 1.62 (95% CI: 1.53, 1.71)], exceeding screen time guidelines [boys: OR 1.43 (95% CI: 1.24, 1.66), girls: OR 1.72 (95% CI: 1.54, 1.92)], and insufficient sleep duration [boys: OR 1.38 (95% CI: 1.28, 1.48), girls: OR 1.36 (95% CI: 1.27, 1.45)] in adolescents with increased loneliness (versus decreased/stayed the same loneliness group). However, we found clinically insignificant results with moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Future longitudinal studies in adolescents are needed to confirm the directionality of these associations. Recovery efforts are needed to support adolescent social health and establish healthy behavioural habits across the lifespan.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".