Intra-abdominal Adiposity and Individual Components of the Metabolic Syndrome in Adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between intra-abdominal adiposity and individual components of the metabolic syndrome (MS) in adolescent males and females. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of a population-based cohort. SETTING: Saguenay Youth Study, Quebec, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 324 adolescents, aged 12 to 18 years. INTERVENTION: Measures were compared between males and females with "high" or "low" intra-abdominal fat (IAF). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intra-abdominal fat was quantified with magnetic resonance imaging. Primary outcome measures were blood pressure (BP) and fasting serum glucose, insulin, lipids, and C-reactive protein levels. Secondary mechanistic measures were cardiovascular variability indexes of autonomic nervous system function, pubertal development, and serum levels of cortisol, leptin, and sex hormones. RESULTS: The MS was completely absent in adolescents with low IAF and was present in 13.8% of males and 8.3% of females with high IAF. Excess IAF was associated with a higher homeostasis model assessment index (0.5 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.3 to 0.8]; P < .001) and triglycerides level (17.7 mg/dL [to convert to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0113] [95% CI, 9.7 to 25.7 mg/dL]; P < .001), lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level (-3.9 mg/dL [to convert to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0259] [95% CI, -6.2 to -1.5 mg/dL]; P = .003), and higher C-reactive protein level (0.03 mg/L [to convert to nanomoles per liter, multiply by 9.524] [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.05 mg/L]; P = .003). High IAF was associated with elevations of BP and sympathetic activity in males only (higher systolic BP, 6 mm Hg [95% CI, 1 to 11 mm Hg]; P = .02 and low-frequency power of diastolic BP, 629 mm Hg2 [95% CI, 37 to 1222 mm Hg2]; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that, already in adolescence, accumulation of IAF may promote development of the MS, affecting the metabolic and inflammatory components similarly in both sexes but influencing BP adversely only in males. The latter may be attributed, in part, to the augmentation of sympathetic activity also seen only in males.
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".