Attitudes and Behaviors towards Food and Weight in Late Pregnancy: A Comparative Approach between Individuals with and without Previous Bariatric Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aims of this study were to compare, between pregnant individuals with and without bariatric surgery: (1) eating behaviors, (2) intuitive eating components and, (3) attitudes towards weight gain. This retrospective study included data collected in healthy pregnant individuals with and without previous bariatric surgery who were recruited at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Québec-Université Laval. Pregnant individuals who underwent bariatric surgery (biliopancreatic bypass with duodenal switch [n = 14] or sleeve gastrectomy [n = 5]) were individually matched, for age (±0.4 years) and body mass index (BMI) (±0.3 kg/m2), with pregnant individuals who have not received bariatric surgery. In the second trimester, participants completed the Three Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ) and the Intuitive Eating Scale 2 (IES-2). In the third trimester, participants completed the French version of the Pregnancy Weight Gain Attitude Scale assessing attitudes towards weight gain. Pregnant individuals who have had bariatric surgery had a higher score for flexible restraint and a lower score for situational susceptibility to disinhibition compared to individuals who have not had undergone bariatric surgery (2.89 ± 1.15 vs. 1.95 ± 1.31; p = 0.04 and 1.11 ± 1.29 vs. 2.79 ± 1.44, respectively; p < 0.001). Regarding intuitive eating, pregnant individuals who experienced bariatric surgery had a higher score for reliance on internal hunger and satiety cues and a lower one for unconditional permission to eat compared with those who had not experienced bariatric surgery (3.99 ± 0.81 vs. 3.30 ± 1.03; p = 0.02 and 3.28 ± 0.54 vs. 3.61 ± 0.68, respectively; p = 0.03). No difference in attitudes towards weight gain was observed between groups. Overall, pregnant individuals who had undergone bariatric surgery had different eating behaviors and intuitive eating components compared to pregnant individuals without bariatric surgery. These results need to be confirmed in further studies with larger sample sizes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".