Polymorphisms of the β<sub>2</sub>‐adrenergic receptor gene (ADRB2) in relation to cardiovascular risk factors in men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Rosmond R, Ukkola O, Chagnon M, Bouchard C & Björntorp P (Department of Heart and Lung Diseases, Göteborg University, Sweden; Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA; Department of Internal Medicine, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland). Polymorphisms of the β2‐adrenergic receptor gene (ADRB2) in relation to cardiovascular risk factors in men. J Intern Med 2000; 248: 239–244. Objective. To investigate the effect of polymorphisms in codon 16 (Arg16Gly) and codon 27 (Gln27Glu) of the β2‐adrenergic receptor gene (ADRB2) on anthropometric, endocrine, metabolic and haemodynamic variables. Design. A cross‐sectional study. Subjects. A subgroup of 284 Swedish men from a population sample of 1040 at the age of 51 years. Main outcome measures. Genotype examination of ADRB2 polymorphisms in codon 16 and codon 27 with polymerase chain reaction and restriction fragment length polymorphism. Anthropometric measurements included body mass index, waist‐to‐hip ratio and abdominal sagittal diameter. Endocrine measurements included blood levels of testosterone, insulin‐like growth factor I, and leptin plus salivary cortisol. Overnight fasting values of serum insulin, blood glucose, triglycerides, total, low and high density lipoprotein cholesterol, as well as blood pressure and resting heart rate, were also determined. Results. Polymorphisms were frequent in both codon 16 and codon 27. The Arg16Gly genotype showed significant relationships to elevated central distribution of body fat and to systolic blood pressure, whilst the Glu27Glu genotype was associated with elevated leptin and triglyceride levels but not to other measurements, including obesity variables. Conclusions. We conclude that only a few cardiovascular risk factors are associated with DNA sequence variation in the ADRB2 in Swedish men.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".