MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020382065 · doi:10.1002/ijc.11089

Glycemic index and glycemic load in endometrial cancer

2003· article· en· W2020382065 on OpenAlexafffund
Livia S. A. Augustin, Silvano Gallus, Cristina Bosetti, Fabio Levi, Eva Negri, Silvia Franceschi, Luigino Dal Maso, David J.A. Jenkins, Cyril W.C. Kendall, Carlo La Vecchia

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cancer · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersGovernment of CanadaAustralian Government
KeywordsEndometrial cancerMedicineGlycemic loadOdds ratioBody mass indexGlycemicConfidence intervalInternal medicineGlycemic indexObesityHormone replacement therapy (female-to-male)CancerDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyGynecologyInsulinOncologyTestosterone (patch)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) are measures of the metabolic effects of dietary carbohydrates. The higher their value, the greater the glucose and insulin responses. Raised insulin levels are associated with endometrial cancer and with its risk factors including obesity, diabetes and hypertension. To study the role of the GI and GL we analyzed the data of two hospital-based case-control studies on endometrial cancer conducted between 1988-98 in Italy and Switzerland, including a total of 410 women with incident, histologically confirmed endometrial cancer and 753 controls admitted for acute, non-neoplastic diseases. A food frequency questionnaire was used to assess the subjects usual diet and to derive estimates of dietary GI and GL. The odds ratios (OR) of endometrial cancer, after adjustment for major risk factors, for the highest versus the lowest quintile of dietary GI and GL were 2.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4-3.2) and 2.7 (95% CI = 1.8-4.2), respectively. The associations were stronger in older women, in those with higher body mass index and in hormone replacement therapy users. Our study supports the hypothesis of a direct association between GI and endometrial cancer risk.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations92
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of CancerSame topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and CancerFrench-language works237,207