MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976729005 · doi:10.1159/000292334

Insulin Response of Women Athletes in Relation to Body Fat Quantified by Magnetic Resonance Imaging

2010· article· en· W1976729005 on OpenAlexaff
Rose E. Frisch, Rachel Snow, Lynn Johnson, Elizabeth G. McFarland, Bruce R. Rosen, Kathryn Erat, Robert L. Barbieri

Bibliographic record

VenueGynecologic and Obstetric Investigation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBody Composition Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsHypertension Canada
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsAthletesInternal medicineEndocrinologyInsulinMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineGlucose tolerance testArea under the curvePancreatic hormoneInsulin resistancePhysical therapyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the glucose and insulin response to a 300-min glucose tolerance test among 17 women athletes as compared with 11 normal, nonatheletic controls. Also reported is the relationship of the insulin area under the curve as a function of percentages of total fat (TF), subcutaneous fat, and internal fat of total volume (TV) quantified by magnetic resonance imaging overall and at six regional sites. Athletes had a more sensitive insulin response to the glucose tolerance test as compared with controls. The insulin area under the curve of athletes and controls was significantly (p = 0.05) related to their overall TF/TV%; athletes had significantly less TF/TV% compared with the controls.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGynecologic and Obstetric InvestigationSame topicBody Composition Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207