Mechanisms of developmental programming of the metabolic syndrome and related disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is consistent epidemiological evidence linking low birth weight, preterm birth and adverse fetal growth to an elevated risk of the metabolic syndrome (obesity, raised blood pressure, raised serum triglycerides, lowered serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and impaired glucose tolerance or insulin resistance) and related disorders. This "fetal or developmental origins/programming of disease" concept is now well accepted but the "programming" mechanisms remain poorly understood. We reviewed the major evidence, implications and limitations of current hypotheses in interpreting developmental programming and discuss future research directions. Major current hypotheses to interpret developmental programming include: (1) thrifty phenotype; (2) postnatal accelerated or catch-up growth; (3) glucocorticoid effects; (4) epigenetic changes; (5) oxidative stress; (6) prenatal hypoxia; (7) placental dysfunction; and (8) reduced stem cell number. Some hypothetical mechanisms (2, 4 and 8) could be driven by other upstream "driver" mechanisms. There is a lack of animal studies addressing multiple mechanisms simultaneously and a lack of strong evidence linking clinical outcomes to biomarkers of the proposed programming mechanisms in humans. There are needs for (1) experimental studies addressing multiple hypothetical mechanisms simultaneously; and (2) prospective pregnancy cohort studies linking biomarkers of the proposed mechanisms to clinical outcomes or surrogate biomarker endpoints. A better understanding of the programming mechanisms is a prerequisite for developing early life interventions to arrest the increasing epidemic of the metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes and other related disorders.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".