Olfactory Capacity and Obesity in Chilean Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Childhood obesity is a global issue, influenced by energy-dense foods and powerful cues that affect brain areas regulating food intake. The olfactory system, linked to food preferences and consumption, is inversely related to body mass index. However, no studies have assessed the possible effect of eating behavior traits on the relationship between olfactory capacity and obesity. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine whether olfactory capacity, eating behavior traits, and body mass index are associated with obesity in adolescents. METHODS: An analysis of 204 Chilean adolescents was undertaken in a cross-sectional study. The proportion of participants with normal weight was found to be 39.2%, that of overweight was 25.9%, and that of obesity was 34.8%. Anthropometric measurements (weight, height, BMI Z-score), eating behavior, and olfactory capacity were evaluated. The Child Eating Behavior Questionnaire (CEBQ) and Food Reinforcement Value Questionnaire (FRVQ) were used to assess eating behavior. The Sniffing sticks test was used to assess olfactory capacity. RESULTS: = 0.01). No gender differences were found in olfactory threshold, discrimination, identification, or TDI (threshold-discrimination-identification) scores, nor nutritional status. Stratified analysis revealed that girls with obesity had significantly lower odor discrimination capacity compared to those with normal weight. CONCLUSIONS: the study highlights a potential link between olfactory function and obesity, with obese girls showing reduced odor discrimination compared to normal-weight girls. Further research is needed to explore these mechanisms and their implications for targeted obesity interventions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".