MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099449218

Public Health Nutrition: 13(9), 1430–1437 doi:10.1017/S1368980010000832 Associations of television viewing, physical activity and dietary behaviours with obesity in aboriginal and non-aboriginal Canadian youth

2010· article· en· W7099449218 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAndrographolide Research and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObesityOddsPhysical activityPublic healthConsumption (sociology)PopulationOdds ratioIntervention (counseling)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To determine associations of diet, physical activity and television (TV) viewing time with obesity among aboriginal and non-aboriginal youth in conjunction with socio-economic variables. Design: Cross-sectional study of differences between aboriginal and non-aboriginal groups and associations between lifestyle and socio-economic factors with obesity were examined. Setting: Population data from the Canadian Community Health Survey Cycle 2?2 conducted in 2004 in the ten provinces of Canada. Subjects: A total of 198 aboriginal and 4448 non-aboriginal Canadian youth aged 12–17 years. Results: Compared to non-aboriginal youth, physical activity participation among aboriginal youth was higher, but consumption of vegetables and dairy products was lower, and more aboriginal youth were ‘high ’ TV watchers. Low income adequacy was associated with decreased odds for obesity among aboriginal youth in contrast to higher odds among non-aboriginal youth. Non-aboriginal ‘high ’ TV watchers consumed more soft drinks and non-whole-grain products than did ‘low ’ TV watchers. Physical activity participation did not differ between ‘high ’ and ‘low ’ TV watchers for both groups, and was associated with lowered odds for obesity only among aboriginal youth. Conclusions: Sociodemographic and lifestyle risk factors associated with obesity differ between aboriginal and non-aboriginal youth. These findings may be useful for guiding intervention efforts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.768

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0810.013

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAndrographolide Research and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207