Abstract P1068: Comparative Analysis of Children’s Persistence in a Lifestyle Modification Program and Body Mass Index Z-Score Changes According to the Access to a Family Grant Program at a Pediatric Obesity Management Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Improving access to healthcare for childhood obesity is crucial, especially in contexts where social vulnerability is a significant risk factor for developing obesity in childhood. Little is known about whether family grant programs (FGP) help remove systemic and institutional barriers to lifestyle therapies for children with obesity. Hypothesis: We tested the hypothesis that access to a FGP favors engagement in a lifestyle modification program and body mass index z-score (BMIz) reduction of children with overweight or obesity at a pediatric obesity management clinic, the Maison de santé prévention – Approche 180, in Montreal (QC, Canada). Methods: This study is designed as a retrospective, longitudinal, comparative analysis of medical records of children (2 to 17 years) with overweight or obesity. Data were collected between April 8, 2021 (FGP implementation) and March 31, 2023. Children in youth centers, foster families, with refugee status or whose parents had a low-income per Canada’s Revenue Agency were eligible for the FGP, which fully covered the costs of multiprofessional services at the clinic. Persistence in the lifestyle program, measured by the number of appointments and follow-up duration, and changes in BMIz over the study period were compared between children based on access to the FGP. Results: Among the 198 included children (100 girls, 98 boys; mean age=11.1 years ± standard deviation (SD)=3.0; mean BMIz=3.30 ± SD=1.05), 62 benefited from the FGP and 136 were not eligible to it. Children from non-two-parent families were 2.46 times more likely to receive the grant compared to those from two-parent families (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.46, 4.13; P=0.0007). Children with the grant had longer follow-up duration [10.29 (95%CI: 8.59, 11.99) vs 6.71 (95%CI: 5.48, 7.93) months; P=0.0007] and similar number of appointments per month [0.81 (95%CI: 0.66, 0.95) vs 0.92 (95%CI: 0.81, 1.02); P=0.42] compared to those without it. Children with the grant achieved similar BMIz changes compared to those without it [-0.31 (95%CI: -0.61, -0.01) vs -0.32 (95%CI: -0.57, -0.06); P=0.92]. Conclusions: FGP was associated with persistence in a lifestyle program that surpassed that of those who were not eligible to it. It enabled children with social vulnerabilities to achieve BMIz reductions comparable to those of children without such vulnerabilities. Free care could help address systemic and institutional barriers to childhood obesity management.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".