MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6990239975

Current Impacts of The Health at Every Size Model Upon Adolescent Health Outcomes: A Literature Review

2023· article· en· W6990239975 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionAdolescent healthMental healthGuidelineObesityInclusion (mineral)OverweightMEDLINEIntervention (counseling)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Child and adolescent obesity is a global concern. The number of youths with obesity is increasing exponentially with subsequent increases in obesity related co-morbidities. Current approaches to treat obesity include weight-normative style interventions which provide no longterm benefits and have increased risk of physical and psychological harms. The Health at Every Size (HAES) model is a safe and inclusive alternative to traditional diet and exercise prescriptions. This approach has been shown to improve patients’ overall health within adult populations. Based on these prior studies, HAES shows great promise for use in adolescent health. Objective: The purpose of this review is to consolidate the current literature available pertaining to use of Health at Every Size and other weight-inclusive strategies within the adolescent population. Through analysis of current evidence, this literature review aims to determine which of the five principles of the Health at Every Size model are effective for improving overall health in the adolescent population. Methods: A literature search using PubMed, Wiley Online Library and the University of Manitoba Online Library databases was conducted using key terms pertaining to Health at Every Size ideology and its associated principles. Eleven articles and one clinical practice guideline were found to meet the inclusion criteria and were included in this literature review. Results: Common themes found across the twelve documents reviewed included positive outcomes in both mental health and sustainable personal care practices in the weight-inclusive intervention groups. Both weight-inclusive and weight-normative groups found improvements in physical health measures. There were minimal improvements in participant weight biases and stigmatization in intervention groups. Conclusion: The Health at Every Size approach to adolescent obesity and health enhancement is effective for improving physical and psychological health. In addition, it teaches sustainable health practices with very little risk to the patient. Adolescence is a time of great change and vulnerability and using an approach that is protective of long-term physical and psychological health outcomes is of the utmost importance. Further research is required on promotion and incorporation of this strategy into primary adolescent care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0150.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicObesity and Health Practices→French-language works237,207→