Circunferência da cintura e relação cintura/estatura: úteis para identificar risco metabólico em adolescentes do sexo feminino?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJETIVO: Avaliar se a medida da circunferência da cintura e a relação cintura/estatura (RCE) são preditoras de fatores de risco cardiovasculares em adolescentes do sexo feminino. MÉTODOS: Avaliaram-se 113 adolescentes de 14 a 19 anos quanto à antropometria (peso, estatura e circunferência da cintura), parâmetros bioquímicos e clínicos (colesterol total, LDL-C, HDL-C, triglicerídeos, glicemia de jejum, insulina, homeostasis model assessment to assess insulin resistance - HOMA-IR, leptina, homocisteína e pressão arterial). Considerou-se como ponto de corte de obesidade abdominal valores de cintura e RCE>percentil 90. RESULTADOS: As adolescentes com obesidade abdominal apresentaram valores significantemente maiores de triglicerídeos (exceto para a RCE), insulina, HOMA-IR, leptina, pressão arterial sistólica e diastólica; o HDL-C foi mais baixo no grupo com cintura >percentil 90, porém sem significância estatística (p=0,052). CONCLUSÕES: O presente estudo demonstrou que a cintura e a RCE são medidas úteis para identificar adolescentes do sexo feminino com maior risco cardiovascular; contudo, a circunferência da cintura, isoladamente, apresentou melhor desempenho.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".