Interplay between actual and perceived weight on mental health among Canadian Indigenous post-secondary students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Research increasingly focuses on the mental health implications of both actual and perceived weight, particularly among post-secondary students. Considering their unique socio-cultural context and the frequent oversight in research, this study examines these implications specifically among Canadian Indigenous post-secondary students. Recent evidence indicates that students with normal weight may also experience increased mental health risks due to negative weight perceptions. Therefore, this study explores the independent and combined effects of actual and perceived weight on the mental health of this group. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: = 1,518). Logistic regression models, stratified by sex, were employed to analyze the data. RESULTS: Perceptions of being overweight were linked to a higher risk of mood and anxiety disorders, poor self-rated mental health, and suicidal ideation among female students. This pattern was less evident among male students. Notably, female students who were overweight and perceived themselves as such were more likely to report poor mental health across all four indicators examined. In contrast, male students exhibited a less clear pattern. Diverging from recent studies, the findings indicated less robust mental health disparities among students with normal weight who perceived themselves as overweight, potentially due to the insufficient cell size of this category among Indigenous post-secondary students. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the complex interplay between actual and perceived weight and its impact on mental health, particularly among female Indigenous post-secondary students.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".