Distribution of Fasting Plasma Insulin, Free Fatty Acids, and Glucose Concentrations and of Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance in a Representative Sample of Quebec Children and Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Plasma fasting insulin and the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) are markers of IR, which, at least in part, mediates the relation of obesity to increased cardiovascular risk. Increased free fatty acids (FFAs) may be involved in the pathogenesis of IR. Our objectives were to describe the distributions of fasting plasma insulin, glucose, and FFAs and HOMA-IR in youth and to assess the relationship between FFAs and markers of IR. METHODS: Fasting plasma insulin, glucose, and FFAs were measured in a representative sample of Quebec youth comprising 2244 individuals 9, 13, and 16 years of age. RESULTS: In all age and sex groups, glucose exhibited remarkably tight distributions (median CV, 7.1%) in contrast to insulin, HOMA-IR, and FFAs (median CVs, 52%, 54% and 45%, respectively). For every percentile examined, 9-year-olds had lower insulin concentrations and HOMA-IR values than 13- and 16-year-olds. We observed strong correlations between insulin concentrations and HOMA-IR values, as well as close similarity in their rankings of individuals. The mean concentrations of glucose were higher in our population than in other Caucasian pediatric populations. No positive correlations were detected between FFAs and markers of IR. CONCLUSIONS: We report some of the first data on the distributions of fasting plasma insulin, HOMA-IR, and FFAs from a representative sample of youth. HOMA-IR does not appear more informative than fasting insulin as a marker of IR. Our findings on higher mean glucose concentrations in this population require confirmation in other representative samples of youth to assess whether the North American distribution of glucose concentrations is shifting positively.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".