MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069186423 · doi:10.1038/oby.2009.80

DXA‐derived Abdominal Fat Mass, Waist Circumference, and Blood Lipids in Postmenopausal Women

2009· article· en· W2069186423 on OpenAlexafffund
Hassanali Vatanparast, Philip D. Chilibeck, Stephen M. Cornish, Jonathan P. Little, Lisa Paus-Jenssen, Allison Case, H. Jay Biem

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBody Composition Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSaskatchewan Health Research Foundation
KeywordsWaistMedicineCircumferenceAbdominal obesityQuartileInternal medicineBody mass indexTriglycerideAnthropometryBlood lipidsEndocrinologyCholesterolConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-derived fat mass indices for predicting blood lipid profile in postmenopausal women. A secondary purpose was to determine whether waist circumference is comparable with DXA-derived measurements in predicting blood lipid profile. Subjects were 423 postmenopausal women (age 58.1 +/- 6.3 years). Fat mass was assessed at abdomen, trunk, and total body using DXA. Anthropometric measurements included BMI and waist circumference. Blood samples were analyzed for total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TAG), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and cholesterol/HDL ratio. Of the DXA-derived measures, abdominal-fat mass was the best predictor of blood lipid profiles. DXA-derived abdominal fat mass and waist girth explained 20 and 16.5% of variation in TC/HDL ratio, respectively, in univariate analysis, with no difference between the slopes of the regression coefficients. Eighty-four percent of subjects were common to the top quartiles of waist circumference and abdominal fat mass, and blood lipid profiles generally worsened across increasing quartiles. DXA-derived abdominal fat mass and waist circumference are of equivalent utility for predicting alterations in blood lipids. Waist circumference is, therefore, ideal as an inexpensive means in primary health-care services for predicting risk of cardiovascular diseases in postmenopausal women.

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)0.002
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations35
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesitySame topicBody Composition Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207