ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2015
Body size dissatisfaction among young adults from the 1982 Pelotas birth cohort.
Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of the relationship between awareness of popular diets and body image among young women: a cross-sectional study.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Misperception of Healthy Weight: Associations Among Weight, Body Size Satisfaction and Body Appreciation in Older Adults.The journal of primary prevention · 2020Article
- Parent-Related Normative Perceptions of Adolescents and Later Weight Control Behavior: Longitudinal Analysis of Cohort Data From Brazil.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesTo identify the prevalence and factors associated with body dissatisfaction. SUBJECTS/
methodsBirth cohort study investigating 4100 subjects (2187 men and 1913 women) aged between 22 and 23 years who answered questionnaires, including the body satisfaction Stunkard Scale were included in the study; they were weighed and measured. Multinomial logistic regression was used in the crude and adjusted analyses.
resultsThe prevalence of body dissatisfaction was 64% (95% CI, 62.7-65.6); 42% (95% CI, 40.6-43.6) of the subjects reported feeling larger than the desired body size, and 22% (95% CI, 20.7-23.3) reported feeling smaller than desired. Underweight subjects, subjects with less schooling, poor and sedentary male subjects with low psychological well-being and female subjects who were already mothers were more likely to express body dissatisfaction, perceiving their body as smaller than the desirable body size. The prevalence of body dissatisfaction was also high among overweight subjects, subjects with a high socioeconomic status and married female subjects, who perceived their body size as too large. Minor psychiatric disorders were associated with body dissatisfaction in all subjects, regardless of perceiving themselves as larger or smaller than the desired body size. Most women perceived themselves as larger, but similar proportions of men perceived themselves as too small or too large.
conclusionsBody dissatisfaction was observed among men and women with normal weight, but it was more evident in the obese individuals. Regardless of the nutritional status, both men and women should be appropriately counseled because body size perception can lead to unhealthy behaviors in relation to diet and physical activity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.