Gender, Adverse Changes in Social Engagement and Risk of Unhealthy Eating: A Prospective Cohort Study of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (2011–2021)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social isolation is linked to survival and health. However, dietary effects of social activities, and gender differences, over time are unknown. METHODS: A prospective study of adults (45+y) reporting daily fruit or vegetable (F/V) intake (at wave 1) from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA). Multivariable mixed logistic regression assessed changes in social isolation or breadth of social participation (wave 1 to 2) in relation to adverse changes in F/V (non-daily intake) at wave 3 in women and men. RESULTS: Women who remained socially isolated between waves 1 and 2 had 85% higher odds of non-daily vegetable intake (OR 1.85 [95% CI: 1.32, 2.59]) and over twofold higher odds of non-daily fruit intake (2.23 [1.58, 3.14]), compared to reference (not isolated at waves 1 and 2). Higher odds of non-daily F/V intake were also observed for women who changed from isolated at wave 1 to not isolated at wave 2. Women and men who had less diverse social participation at waves 1 and 2 had 28-64% higher odds of non-daily F/V intake, compared to their counterparts with diverse social participation at both waves. Higher odds of non-daily fruit were also seen for women who had diverse social participation at wave 1 but reduced their diversity at wave 2 (1.35 [1.12, 1.62]). CONCLUSIONS: Results showed persistent social isolation impacted changes in F/V among women only, while limited breadth of social participation affected F/V intake in both genders. Further longitudinal research on the complexities of social engagement and eating behavior 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".