Definitions of Metabolic Syndrome: Where are We Now?
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 metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a cluster of metabolic abnormalities including abdominal obesity, glucose intolerance, hypertension and dyslipidaemia and is associated with an increased risk of vascular events. Since the initial description of the MetS, several expert groups produced different definitions. This variability led to confusion and absence of comparability between studies. Although there is agreement that the MetS is a major public health challenge worldwide and consistent evidence stresses the need for intervention, the definition of the syndrome remains a matter of debate. This review considers the different definitions of the MetS. These include those proposed by the World Health Organisation, the European Group for the Study of Insulin Resistance, the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III, the American College of Endocrinology and American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the latest International Diabetes Federation definition which includes ethnic-specific waist circumference cut-off points. These definitions share several features but also include important differences; all have limitations. Selected (after a Medline search) studies comparing the different definitions are also considered. There is a need for a standardised definition of the MetS. Furthermore, a definition tailored for children and adolescents is essential. Prospective long-term studies are needed to validate the prognostic power of these definitions. As new information becomes available the definition of the MetS might be further modified.
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) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it