Visceral Adipose Tissue Accumulation, Cardiorespiratory Fitness, and Features of the Metabolic Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that overweight and obese individuals with an adequate level of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), the so-called fat and fit, are at reduced risk of coronary heart disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: To determine whether individuals with low CRF have more visceral adipose tissue (AT) accumulation compared with individuals with high CRF and to verify whether low CRF is associated with a poorer metabolic profile, we performed a cross-sectional study of 169 asymptomatic men without diabetes mellitus (mean +/- SD body mass index [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared], 25.9 +/- 4.4; and mean +/- SD age, 37.1 +/- 14.0 years). Abdominal AT accumulation, CRF, and indexes of plasma glucose-insulin homeostasis and of the lipoprotein-lipid profile were measured. RESULTS: More visceral AT accumulation was observed among men in the lowest tertile of CRF compared with men in the highest tertile of CRF (mean +/- SD, 139.6 +/- 70.2 cm2 vs 74.7 +/- 41.6 cm2; P < .001). Overall, the plasma lipoprotein-lipid profiles were more favorable in men with a high CRF compared with individuals with a low CRF, as men with a low CRF had higher triglyceride (mean +/- SD, 161 +/- 73 mg/dL vs 99 +/-45 mg/dL; P < .001) and apolipoprotein B (mean +/- SD, 106 +/- 23 mg/dL vs 89 +/- 24 mg/dL; P < .009) levels and an increased total cholesterol-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (mean +/- SD, 5.27 +/- 1.00 vs 3.96 +/- 1.17; P = .002) than men with high CRF. After matching individuals with similar body mass index values but with high or low CRF, men with low CRF were characterized by more visceral AT accumulation than men with high CRF (mean +/- SD, 114.4 +/- 59.9 cm2 vs 87.8 +/- 49.1 cm2; P < .007) and by a poorer metabolic profile. However, when matched for visceral AT accumulation, such differences were no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSION: This study underlines the importance of visceral AT accumulation in the previously reported association between CRF and metabolic complications predictive of coronary heart disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".