Obesity and metabolic correlates among the Inuit and a general Danish population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: [corrected] Obesity and central fat pattern are associated with several cardiovascular risk factors incluy ding insulin resistance, glucose intolerance, hypertension and dyslipidemia in most populations. The study aims to assess the occurrence and metabolic correlates of obesity among Greenlanders and Danes. STUDY DESIGN: From 1999 to 2001, 917 adult Inuit participated in a health survey in Greenland. The examination included an oral glucose tolerance test. Body Mass Index, waist circumference, and blood pressure were measured. P-glucose, s-insulin, and lipids were measured. Data from the Danish study 'Inter99' (n=5606) conducted in 1999-2000 were used for comparison. RESULTS: Compared with the Inter99 population, a larger proportion of Inuit women were centrally obese (58.1% vs.17.8%, p<0.001) and central obesity was present in 15.9% of Inuit men vs. 8.3% of the Danish men (p<0.001). At any given level of obesity the Inuit had lower levels of 2-hour glucose and insulin, blood pressure, triglyceride, and higher levels of HDL cholesterol than the Danish participants. Fasting glucose and fasting insulin levels within obesity categories were not different in the two populations. CONCLUSION: Central fat pattern and obesity are more prevalent among the Inuit, but the obesity observed among the Inuit is not associated with the same degree of metabolic disturbances as in a general Danish 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".