MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407269619 · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2025.107904

Associations between intuitive eating, overall diet quality, and physical health indicators: Results of the PREDISE study

2025· article· en· W4407269619 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Thomas Sire, Noémie Carbonneau, Simone Lemieux, Élise Carbonneau

Bibliographic record

VenueAppetite · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychologyPhysical healthQuality (philosophy)Environmental healthMedicineMental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intuitive eating is a positive approach to eating involving high responsiveness to hunger and satiety cues. Although the association between intuitive eating and many psychological health indicators is well-documented, its associations with overall diet quality and physical health indicators are less explored. This study aimed to assess whether intuitive eating is associated with adherence to Canada's Food Guide recommendations and with physical health indicators. In the context of the PREDISE study, 1088 French-speaking Canadian adults from the Province of Québec completed a web-based survey including the Intuitive Eating Scale-2. Three web-based 24-h dietary recalls were completed and used to calculate the Canadian Healthy Eating Index (C-HEI) score, an indicator of adherence to Canada's Food Guide. Participants visited the research center to assess physical health indicators (body mass index, waist circumference, blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood glucose). Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to assess how intuitive eating is associated with diet quality and physical health indicators. The total intuitive eating score was not associated with C-HEI (B = 1.47, 95% CI: -0.10, 3.04). However, the "Body-Food Choice Congruence" subscale was positively associated with C-HEI (B = 5.60, 95% CI: 4.44, 6.76), while the "Unconditional Permission to Eat" subscale was negatively associated with C-HEI (B = -4.04, 95% CI: -5.28, -2.80). The total intuitive eating score was negatively associated with BMI in men (B = -4.83, 95% CI: -5.75, -3.91, p < 0.0001) and women (B = -5.01, 95% CI: -6.00, -4.02, p < 0.0001), with waist circumference in men (B = -3.60, 95% CI: -5.33, -1.87) and women (B = -2.20, 95% CI: -3.71, -0.70), and with HDL cholesterol only in women (B = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.17, -0.02). The associations of intuitive eating with diet quality are inconsistent, and only a few associations with physical health indicators were observed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.364 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAppetiteSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207