Gender Differences in Nicotine Induced Dyslipidemia and Hyperglycemia in Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the prevalence of metabolic syndrome in nicotine treated male and female mice and to evaluate gender related differences. For these purposes adult male and female BALB/C mice were subjected to chronic nicotine treatment (3.08mg/100ml in drinking water) for 4 weeks. Serum glucose, albumin, corticosterone and lipid profile levels were determined. Body weight changes were also monitored. We have found that nicotine treatment raises total cholesterol and glucose levels more in male as compared to female mice. Low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were increased by 35% (P<0.01) only in male mice. However rise in triglycerides were greater in females (28%) than males (21%) when compared with their respective controls. Serum albumin levels were increased in both sexes showing 13% greater increase in males as compared to females. However nicotine treatment had no effect on high density lipoprotein cholesterol, corticosterone levels and body weights in both genders. It is concluded that nicotine use is positively associated with LDL-C in males; the results are discussed in relation to prevalence of metabolic syndrome andrisk of cardiovascular events in nicotine users.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".