Changing eating to manage weight or shape: A cross-sectional and prospective study of the prevalence and correlates in a large Canadian adolescent cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present study examined reports of changing eating to manage weight/shape over one year among adolescents. It also tested how changing eating for weight/shape was associated with physical activity (resistance training, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; MVPA) and mental health (depressive symptoms, flourishing), and whether weight perceptions moderated these associations. METHODS: ± SD = 14.4 ± 1.3, 52.9% girls) who completed self-report surveys in the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 waves of the COMPASS study. Separate multilevel models were tested for each outcome. RESULTS: Approximately 30% of adolescents reported changing their eating to manage weight/shape at least once a week. More days of changing eating were associated with significantly higher depressive symptoms and lower flourishing cross-sectionally (b = 0.51, b = -0.27) and over time (b = 0.35, -0.20); the flourishing association over time was weaker for adolescents who perceived themselves as overweight relative to about right. More days of changing eating were also associated with more MVPA and resistance training cross-sectionally (b = 2.81, b = 0.19) and over time (b = 1.28, b = 10). The relationship between changing eating and MVPA over time was stronger for adolescents who perceived themselves as overweight relative to about right; whereas the cross-sectional relationship between changing eating and resistance training was weaker. CONCLUSIONS: Reports of changing eating to manage weight/shape were associated with divergent health outcomes; research into how and to what extreme adolescents are changing eating to manage weight/shape, and identity factors that may contribute to these differences, is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".