The relation between weight-based teasing and psychological adjustment in adolescents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of weight-based teasing, and evaluate its association with depression, anxiety and unhealthy eating behaviour in a large sample of adolescents in the Ottawa (Ontario) area. METHODS: A total of 1491 adolescents from public and private middle schools and high schools in rural and urban areas of Ottawa responded confidentially to surveys. RESULTS: More girls than boys reported that they experienced weight-based teasing (33% versus 18%). The prevalence of weight-based teasing by peers was significantly higher among overweight and obese youth than among normal weight youth (45% versus 22%). Teasing about body weight was consistently associated with anxiety, psychological distress and disordered eating, and these associations held for both boys and girls, and were independent of weight status. CONCLUSIONS: Weight-based teasing is a common experience among Ottawa-area adolescents, especially among overweight girls, and was found to be associated with psychological morbidity. Effective interventions are needed to help victims cope with and prevent further weight-based teasing and its harmful psychological sequelae.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it