Association of sleep duration with obesity in older adults: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research on sleep duration and obesity is extensive in children and young individuals but limited and inconsistent for older adults. Our study aims to clarify the current status of this association in the elderly population. METHODS: We searched six English and four Chinese databases up to January 25, 2024, for observational studies on sleep duration and obesity in older adults. Two researchers independently conducted the literature search and data extraction. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for cross-sectional studies. Meta-analyses were performed using Stata 15.0 software, using both random-effects and fixed-effects models to calculate pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The meta-analysis of 15 studies found a correlation between short sleep duration and obesity in older individuals (pooled odds ratio, 1.40 [95% CI: 1.12-1.73]; P = 0.003). However, no significant correlation was found between long sleep duration and obesity among the elderly (pooled odds ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.95-1.13]; P = 0.426). CONCLUSIONS: Short sleep duration in the elderly was associated with obesity. More prospective studies need to be included in the future to improve the reliability of the conclusions. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2024; 24: 1269-1282.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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 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".