Whole-body skeletal muscle mass is not related to glucose tolerance or insulin sensitivity in overweight and obese men and women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between skeletal muscle mass, visceral adipose tissue, insulin sensitivity, and glucose tolerance was examined in 214 overweight or obese, but otherwise healthy, men (n = 98) and women (n = 116) who participated in various exercise and (or) weight-loss intervention studies. Subjects had a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test and (or) insulin sensitivity measures by a 3 h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp technique. Whole-body skeletal muscle mass and visceral adipose tissue were measured using a multi-slice magnetic resonance imaging protocol. Total body skeletal muscle mass was not associated with any measure of glucose metabolism in men or women (p > 0.10). These observations remained independent of age and total adiposity. Conversely, visceral adipose tissue was a significant predictor of various measures of glucose metabolism in both men and women with or without control for age and (or) total body fat (p < 0.05). Although skeletal muscle is a primary site for glucose uptake and deposition, these findings suggest that unlike visceral adipose tissue, whole-body skeletal muscle mass per se is not associated with either glucose tolerance or insulin sensitivity in overweight and obese men and women.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".