MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1940156094 · doi:10.1002/oby.20646

Hyperphagia: Current concepts and future directions proceedings of the 2nd international conference on hyperphagia

2014· article· en· W1940156094 on OpenAlexaff
Steven B. Heymsfield, Nicole M. Avena, Leslie J. Baier, Phillip J. Brantley, George A. Bray, Lisa C. Burnett, Merlin G. Butler, Daniel J. Driscoll, Dieter Egli, Joel K. Elmquist, Janice L. Forster, Anthony P. Goldstone, Linda M. Gourash, Frank L. Greenway, Joan C. Han, James G. Kane, Rudolph L. Leibel, Ruth J. F. Loos, Ann Scheimann, Christian L. Roth, Randy J. Seeley, Val C. Sheffield, M. Tauber, Christian Vaisse, Liheng Wang, Robert A. Waterland, Rachel Wevrick, Jack A. Yanovski, Andrew R. Zinn

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutophagy in Disease and Therapy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Eye InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsScope (computer science)PopulationMedicinePolitical scienceComputer scienceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Hyperphagia is a central feature of inherited disorders (e.g., Prader-Willi Syndrome) in which obesity is a primary phenotypic component. Hyperphagia may also contribute to obesity as observed in the general population, thus raising the potential importance of common underlying mechanisms and treatments. Substantial gaps in understanding the molecular basis of inherited hyperphagia syndromes are present as are a lack of mechanistic of mechanistic targets that can serve as a basis for pharmacologic and behavioral treatments. DESIGN AND METHODS: International conference with 28 experts, including scientists and caregivers, providing presentations, panel discussions, and debates. RESULTS: The reviewed collective research and clinical experience provides a critical body of new and novel information on hyperphagia at levels ranging from molecular to population. Gaps in understanding and tools needed for additional research were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This report documents the full scope of important topics reviewed at a comprehensive international meeting devoted to the topic of hyperphagia and identifies key areas for future funding and research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations128
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesitySame topicAutophagy in Disease and TherapyFrench-language works237,207