Effect of Android to Gynoid Fat Ratio on Insulin Resistance in Obese Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Upper body fat distribution is associated with the early development of insulin resistance in obese children and adolescents. OBJECTIVE: To determine if an android to gynoid fat ratio is associated with the severity of insulin resistance in obese children and adolescents, whereas peripheral subcutaneous fat may have a protective effect against insulin resistance. SETTING: The pediatric department of University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, France. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis using data from medical consultations between January 2005 and January 2007. PARTICIPANTS: Data from 66 obese children and adolescents coming to the hospital for medical consultation were used in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects were stratified into tertiles of android to gynoid fat ratio determined by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Insulin resistance was assessed by the homeostasis model of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index. RESULTS: There were no differences in weight, body mass index, and body fat percentage between tertiles. Values of HOMA-IR were significantly increased in the 2 higher tertiles (mean [SD], tertile 2, 2.73 [1.41]; tertile 3, 2.89 [1.28]) compared with the lower tertile (tertile 1, 1.67 [1.24]) of android to gynoid fat ratio (P < .001). The HOMA-IR value was significantly associated with android to gynoid fat ratio (r = 0.35; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Android fat distribution is associated with an increased insulin resistance in obese children and adolescents. An android to gynoid fat ratio based on dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry measurements is a useful and simple technique to assess distribution of body fat associated with an increased risk of insulin resistance.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".