A clinically managed weight loss program evaluation and the impact of COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: With the prevalence of obesity increasing, many weight-loss programs were created to aid in combating the trend. The Weight Loss Clinic (WLC) was created to provide personalized support for lifestyle changes using a multidisciplinary team with medical oversight. This study evaluated the clinically-managed weight loss program at the Wellness Institute. Methods: This was a prospective evaluation of a newly established program between January 2019-August 2020. Participants who entered the weight loss program were approached to learn about the evaluation. A total of 41 participants were included. The primary outcomes included changes in body weight and achievement of more than 5% initial body weight loss. Outcome measures were collected pre-and post-program and the data was analyzed through paired t-tests on R studio. Results: = 0.02). Completers pre-COVID-19 demonstrated improvements in waist circumference, Framingham risk score, blood pressure, hemoglobin A1C, and body fat percentage. Conclusions and implications: Though the sample size was small to show definitve evidence, the results may suggest the program worked well prior to the pandemic but the pandemic created barriers to weight-loss for participants.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".