Basal metabolic rate in morbidly obese patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease occurs mainly in severly obese patients and its relationship to Metabolic Syndrome is increasingly recognized. The aim of this study was to determine energy production-utilization by measuring the Basal Metabolic Rate in severely obese patients, characterized by NAFLD, with or without Metabolic Syndrome. Then, the role of systemic inflammation was assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty severly obese men with Metabolic Syndrome were compared with a well-matched cohort of patients without Metabolic Syndrome. All showed hepatic steatosis at UltraSonography. Basal Metabolic Rate was measured by indirect calorimetry using a canopy system and single-frequency bio-impedance analysis. Serum Interleukin-6 and fibrinogen levels were measured as markers of inflammation RESULTS: Basal Metabolic Rate was higher in severely obese patients with Metabolic Syndrome than in those without it: 2,496+/-358 kcal/d vs 2,126+/-253 kcal/d, P = 0 .001. Laboratory findings of concurrent chronic inflammation were also higher in these patients, i.e., Il6 4.35+/-1.34 pg/ml vs 6.23+/-2.1 pg/ml, P = 0.034; fibrinogenemia 285+/-40 mg/dL vs 376+/-91 mg/dL, P = 0.020; these of of cytonecrosis, i.e., AlaninaminoTransferase, equally behaved 32.3+/-7.9 UI vs 65.7+/-28.2 UI, P < 0.001. Visceral adiposity and arterial hypertension were more frequently detected in patients with Metabolic Syndrome. CONCLUSION: Increased energy expenditure, observed in morbidly obese patients as a consequence of a systemic, low-grade, inflammatory process, may explain progression from obesity to Metabolic Syndrome, independent of the presence of NAFLD. In this context, increased Basal Metabolic Rate may be a clue of Metabolic Syndrome.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".