Satiety quotient linked to food intake and changes in anthropometry during menopause: a MONET Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: It is unknown whether the satiety quotient (SQ) differs across the menopausal transition, and whether changes in SQ are related to changes in anthropometric/body composition variables. The objective of this study was to evaluate the changes in SQ and its association with energy intake and changes in anthropometric/body composition variables across the menopausal transition. METHODS: At baseline, 102 premenopausal women (aged 49.9 ± 1.9 years, body mass index 23.3 ± 2.2 kg/m(2)) took part in a 5-year observational, longitudinal study. Body composition (DXA), appetite (visual analog scales), energy and macronutrient intakes (ad libitum lunch and 7-day food diary) were assessed annually. The SQ (mm/100 kcal) was calculated at 60 and 180 min post-breakfast consumption. RESULTS: Overall, the SQ increased at years 3 and 4 (p = 0.01-0.0001), despite no significant differences between menopausal status groups. Lower fullness, prospective food consumption and mean SQ values predicted overall increases in lunch energy and macronutrient intakes (p = 0.04-0.01), whereas only prospective food consumption and fullness SQ predicted energy intake and carbohydrate intake, respectively, when assessed with food diaries (p = 0.01). Delta SQs were negatively correlated with changes in waist circumference (p = 0.03-0.02), whereas delta SQs were positively (p = 0.04) and negatively (p = 0.02) associated with delta fat mass between years 1 and 5, and years 4 and 5, respectively. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that variations in SQ across the menopausal transition are related to energy and macronutrient intakes and coincide with changes in body composition and waist circumference.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".