Familial confounding of internalising symptoms and obesity in adolescents and young adults; a co-twin analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity and internalising disorders, including depression and anxiety, often co-occur. There is evidence that familial confounding contributes to the co-occurrence of internalising disorders and obesity in adults. However, its impact on this association among young people is unclear. Our study investigated the extent to which familial factors confound the association between internalising disorders and obesity in adolescents and young adults. SUBJECTS/METHODS: We used a matched co-twin design to investigate the impact of confounding by familial factors on associations between internalising symptoms and obesity in a sample of 4018 twins aged 16 to 27 years. RESULTS: High levels of internalising symptoms compared to low levels increased the odds of obesity for the whole cohort (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.1, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5, 6.8), and in females (AOR = 4.1, 95% CI 1.5, 11.1), but not in males (AOR = 2.8 95% CI 0.8, 10.0). We found evidence that internalising symptoms were associated with an increased between-pair odds of obesity (AOR 6.2, 95% CI 1.7, 22.8), using the paired analysis but not using a within-pair association, which controls for familial confounding. Sex-stratified analyses indicated high internalising symptoms were associated with increased between-pair odds of obesity for females (AOR 12.9, 95% CI 2.2, 76.8), but this attenuated to the null using within-pair analysis. We found no evidence of between or within-pair associations for males and weak evidence that sex modified the association between internalising symptoms and obesity (likelihood ratio test p = 0.051). CONCLUSIONS: Some familial factors shared by twins confound the association between internalising symptoms and obesity in adolescent and young adult females. Internalising symptoms and obesity were not associated for adolescent and young adult males. Therefore, prevention and treatment efforts should especially address familial shared determinants of obesity, particularly targeted at female adolescents and young adults with internalising symptoms and those with a family history of these disorders.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".