Association between physical activity, adiposity, and lipid abnormalities in children with familial hyperlipidemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The benefits of physical activity in children have been studied extensively; however, its role in children with familial hyperlipidemia (FH) is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine associations between physical activity, adiposity, and lipid profiles in children with FH. DESIGN: A physical activity questionnaire was completed by 147 children with FH. Correlations between activity levels, body mass index (BMI), and fasting lipid profiles were determined. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 12.5+/-3.2 years with a mean total cholesterol of 6.17 mmol/l (238 mg/dl), low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol of 4.43 (171), high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol of 1.08 (42), and triglyceride levels of 1.51 (134). Patients had greater weight for height indices than normal, with a mean BMI z score of +0.90+/-1.30 SD (P<0.001 versus normal), and with 21% of the participants being more than 2 SD above normal. Higher BMI z scores significantly correlated with higher triglyceride levels (r=0.33; P<0.0001) and greater time spent in sedentary pursuits (r=0.24; P=0.004), in particular watching television (r=0.26; P=0.003). The increased time that other family members spent in physical activity significantly correlated with a lower BMI z score (r=-0.21; P=0.01) of the patient and greater time spent in physical activity (r=0.24; P=0.003). There was no association between patients' physical activity levels and lipid profile or BMI. CONCLUSION: Similar to the general population, children with FH are also at risk of becoming overweight. Increased adiposity significantly correlated with the greater sedentary activities of the patient, lower physical activities of the family, and higher triglyceride levels. Physical activity levels of the patient correlated with family activity levels.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".