Effect of Yoga and Naturopathy Treatments on Psychological Burden in Obesity: A Single Case Report
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity is defined as abnormal or excessive fat accumulation in the body and is a major risk factor for various noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), such as diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. According to the World Health Organization, more than 1 billion people worldwide are obese—650 million adults, 340 million adolescents, and 39 million children. The often ignored component of obesity is the psychological burden associated with the condition impacting multiple aspects such as low self-esteem, depression, and anxiety. This case report shows the effect of an integrated yoga and naturopathy-based lifestyle in a patient with morbid obesity, with special reference to his psychological status. A 19-year-old male college student diagnosed with obesity underwent integrated yoga and naturopathy management for a period of 20 days. Outcome measures such as anthropometric measurements, positive and negative affects scale (PANAS), depression, anxiety, and stress scale (DASS), and day-to-day activity scale were taken before and after the 20-day intervention period. Results showed improvements in negative affect, depression, and anxiety levels, along with a reduction in body weight. Further studies with adequate sample sizes and experimental study designs are required to validate our findings.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it