Sedentary Behaviour, Visceral Fat Accumulation and Cardiometabolic Risk in Adults: A 6-Year Longitudinal Study from the Quebec Family Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sedentary behaviour has recently emerged as a unique risk factor for chronic disease morbidity and mortality. One factor that may explain this relationship is visceral adiposity, which is prospectively associated with increased cardiometabolic risk and mortality. The objective of the present study was to determine whether sedentary behaviour was associated with increased accumulation of visceral fat or other deleterious changes in cardiometabolic risk over a 6-year follow-up period among adult participants in the Quebec Family Study. METHODS: The current study included 123 men and 153 women between the ages of 18 and 65. Total sedentary time and physical activity were assessed by self-report questionnaire. Cross-sectional areas of visceral and subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue were assessed using computed tomography. Cardiometabolic biomarkers including fasting insulin, glucose, blood lipids, HOMA-Insulin Resistance, and oral glucose tolerance were also measured. All variables of interest were collected at both baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: After adjustment for age, sex, baseline BMI, physical activity, energy intake, smoking, education, income and menopausal status, baseline sedentary behaviour was not associated with changes in visceral adiposity or any other marker of cardiometabolic risk. In the longitudinal model which adjusted for all studied covariates, every 15-minute increase in sedentary behaviour from baseline to follow-up was associated with a 0.13 cm increase in waist circumference (95% CI = 0.02, 0.25). However, there was no association between changes in sedentary behaviour and changes in visceral adiposity or other markers of cardiometabolic risk. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that neither baseline sedentary behaviour nor changes in sedentary behaviour are associated with longitudinal changes in visceral adiposity in adult men and women. With the exception of waist circumference, the present study did not find evidence of a relationship between sedentary behaviour and any marker of cardiometabolic risk in this population.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".