Obesity and Cardiovascular Physiology: Impact of some Pharmacological Agents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increase in obesity prevalence is problematic as this condition is associated with health complications such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases, more particularly when the excess body fat is stored in the deep abdominal region. The mainstay of therapy consists of behavior modification related to obesity such as overeating and physical inactivity. When these lifestyle modifying attempts fail, the use of anti-obesity drugs is warranted. Drug treatment is often indicated but is somewhat limited by the minimal number of well tolerated drugs that have proven to have long-term efficacy in maintaining body weight loss. The currently available drugs, sibutramine and orlistat, appear modestly effective in promoting weight loss. Ongoing studies continue to evaluate other drug treatments that may result in body weight reduction through a number of different mechanisms. Thus, the aim of this review is to present an overview of the current drugs available (particularly sibutramine and orlistat) as well as potential future candidates, and the impact of these agents on obesity and cardiovascular physiology. Furthermore, the therapeutic paradox of sibutramine in preventing obesity will be discussed as well as the beneficial impact of physical exercise on cardiac economy.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it