Waist‐to‐hip ratio and adipose tissue distribution: Contribution of subcutaneous adiposity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) reflects the relative distribution of adipose tissue in the human body. However, whether this is due to the musculoskeletal structures of the waist and hip or the overlying subcutaneous adipose tissue has been disputed. We measured waist and hip girths in 11 male and 11 female cadavers, aged 55-94 years, before and after complete removal of skin and subcutaneous adipose tissue. Girths measured following removal of subcutaneous adipose tissue were termed "waist gx" and "hip gx", and their ratio "WHRx". Masses of regional adipose tissue segments were obtained by complete dissection, and the adipose mass ratios "trunk/arm-plus-leg", "trunk/leg", "internal/arm-plus-leg", and "internal/leg" were derived. As assessed by analysis of variance, WHR accounted for significant (P < 0.05) portions of the variance in all adipose mass ratios; adjustment for internal adipose mass increased the significance of all these relationships (P < 0.005). The ratio WHRx was not related to any ratio of regional adipose masses. Waist girth was related to trunk (P < 0.001) and internal (P < 0.05) adipose masses, and hip girth was related to arm-plus-leg adipose mass (P < 0.0001) and leg adipose mass (P < 0.0001), but waist gx and hip gx were not related to dependent variables. The results indicate that the ability of WHR and waist and hip girths to reflect the regional distribution of adipose tissue in the body is dependent upon the subcutaneous adipose tissue mass of the waist hip area, not its musculoskeletal constituency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".