The Trends of Metabolic Syndrome in Normal-Weight Tehranian Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In recent decades, more attention has been directed to the clustering of cardiometabolic risk factors in normal-weight adults. This study investigates trends of the prevalence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in a normal-weight Tehranian adult population during 6.6 years of follow-up. METHODS: In this population-based cohort study of 5,269 participants aged ≥ 20 years during the 3 phases (1999-2001, 2002-2005 and 2005-2008) of the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study, we selected 390 males and 358 females with a normal body mass index (18.5-24.9) during all 3 periods of follow-up. MetS was defined according to the International Diabetes Federation criteria, and waist circumference (WC) cut points were ≥ 89 cm for males and ≥ 91 cm for females. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of MetS increased from 2.3 and 4.0% in phases I and II to 9.6% in phase III. This trend was significant in males (p < 0.001) but not in females (p = 0.6). No significant changes in components of MetS were seen, except in WC among males. In the 3 study phases, prevalence of abdominal obesity was 3.1, 18.5 and 36.2% in males, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There was a dramatic 4-fold increase in the prevalence of MetS in the Tehranian normal-weight adult population, highlighting the importance of MetS components, especially of WC, in normal-weight adult males.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".