Relationship of Mid-Thigh Adiposity to the Metabolic Syndrome in Postmenopausal Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In postmenopausal women, a population at risk for the metabolic syndrome, the relative contribution of central fat versus peripheral muscle fat to the metabolic risk profile is unknown. This study explored the relationship between muscle fat infiltration derived from computed tomography (CT) scans and metabolic syndrome. METHODS: Mid-thigh CT scans measured the surface of muscle with low attenuation (LAMS) [0-34 Hounsfield units (HU)], which represented the specific component of fat-rich muscle. Insulin sensitivity was evaluated by an euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp. National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) criteria were used to determine the presence of the metabolic syndrome. RESULTS: A total of 103 postmenopausal women were studied. Metabolic syndrome was found in 43 women with significantly higher levels of abdominal adiposity, higher LAMS (27 +/- 8 vs. 23 +/- 7 cm(2)), and lower insulin sensitivity compared to those without the metabolic syndrome. Women with higher levels of LAMS presented higher metabolic risk features such as higher blood pressure, abdominal adiposity, inflammatory markers, and blood lipid levels. LAMS and visceral adipose tissue correlated significantly with the presence of metabolic syndrome, but these relationships were lost when LAMS was adjusted for visceral adipose tissue but not when visceral adipose tissue was adjusted for LAMS. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that postmenopausal women who present with metabolic syndrome had increased fat-rich mid-thigh muscle. Moreover, women with more fat-rich muscle had many features of the metabolic syndrome. These relations were weakened when visceral adipose tissue was taken into account suggesting that LAMS may play a relatively smaller role, compared to VAT, in the contribution to the metabolic syndrome.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".