Waist circumference and cardiorespiratory fitness are independently associated with glucose tolerance and insulin resistance in obese women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the independent associations between physical activity (PA), cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), abdominal obesity and insulin action in obese women. We studied 141 abdominally obese women (waist circumference (WC): 106.4 ± 10.2 cm). PA duration (min/day) and intensity (counts/min) were obtained by accelerometry. CRF was measured using a treadmill. WC was measured at the iliac crest; abdominal adiposity was measured by magnetic resonance imaging. Glucose and insulin measures were obtained during a 75-g, 2-h glucose tolerance test. The homeostasis model of assessment iHOMA2-IS was used to estimate insulin sensitivity. PA duration and intensity were not associated with glucose or insulin metabolism (p > 0.05). However, moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) duration was associated with fasting insulin and iHOMA2-IS (p < 0.01). CRF was associated with fasting insulin and iHOMA2-IS (r = 0.27, p ≤ 0.01), whereas WC was associated with fasting insulin (r = 0.50, p < 0.01) and iHOMA2-IS (r = -0.52, p ≤ 0.01). Following adjustment for CRF, MVPA, and age, WC remained associated with fasting glucose, insulin, 2-h glucose and iHOMA2-IS (r = -0.44, p ≤ 0.01). CRF was associated with fasting glucose as well as 1- and 2-h glucose (r = 0.24, p < 0.01) after adjusting for WC, MVPA, and age. MVPA was not associated with glucose or insulin measures after control for CRF and WC (p > 0.05). Mediation analysis revealed that CRF and WC combined mediated the relationship between MVPA and both glucose tolerance and insulin resistance (p < 0.05). In conclusion, among abdominally obese women, WC and CRF are independently associated with measures of glucose tolerance and insulin resistance and mediate the association between MVPA and insulin resistance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".