Ectopic fat in youth: The contribution of hepatic and pancreatic fat to metabolic disturbances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the relationships between parameters of glucose and insulin metabolism and visceral and abdominal ectopic fat in youth. METHODS: A cross sectional study of 50 children (24 females), 8-18 years old. Anthropometrics, body composition, blood-work and visceral and ectopic fat by magnetic resonance imaging were assessed. Insulin secretion, insulin sensitivity and beta cell function were calculated from an oral glucose tolerance test. RESULTS: BMI z-scores ranged between -1.3 and 4.5. The hepatic fat fraction (HFF) ranged between 0 and 36% and pancreatic fat fraction (PFF) between 0 and 14%. Visceral fat, HFF and PFF were associated with clinical and biochemical metabolic abnormalities, and correlated with markers of insulin sensitivity (r = -0.60, P < 0.01; r = -0.64, P < 0.01; r = -0.48, P < 0.01, respectively) insulin secretion (r = 0.55, P < 0.01; r = 0.57, P < 0.01; r = 0.41, P < 0.01, respectively), and beta cell function (r = -0.49, P < 0.01; r = -0.59, P < 0.01; r = -0.39, P < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Accumulations of pancreatic and hepatic fat have complementary clinical consequences in youth. While visceral and hepatic fat demonstrated a dominant effect, even relatively small degrees of pancreatic fat deposition may contribute to metabolic alterations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".