MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154900951 · doi:10.1210/jc.2014-2210

Changes in Leptin and Peptide YY Do Not Explain the Greater-Than-Predicted Decreases in Resting Energy Expenditure After Weight Loss

2014· article· en· W2154900951 on OpenAlexafffund
Jessica McNeil, Alexander Schwartz, Rémi Rabasa‐Lhoret, Jean-Marc Lavoie, Martin Brochu, Éric Doucet

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicRegulation of Appetite and Obesity
Canadian institutionsHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of SherbrookeUniversité de MontréalMontreal Clinical Research InstituteCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of OttawaUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsLeptinPeptide YYResting energy expenditureInternal medicineEndocrinologyWeight lossOverweightMedicineBody mass indexObesityAnimal scienceEnergy expenditureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: It is unknown whether leptin and peptide YY (PYY) influence changes in resting energy expenditure (REE), independently of fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) in addition to changes in other energy expenditure (EE) components during weight loss. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to examine the relationships between leptin, PYY, and body composition with different EE components before and after weight loss and whether changes in leptin and PYY were associated with differences in predicted vs measured REE after the intervention. DESIGN: This was a randomized controlled design. SETTING: The study was conducted in a laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were ninety-three overweight/obese postmenopausal women (aged 58.1 ± 4.8 y; body mass index 32.1 ± 4.3 kg/m(2)). INTERVENTION: Interventions included a 6-month caloric restriction diet alone or caloric restriction diet+resistance training. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Body composition (dual energy x-ray absorptiometry), REE (indirect calorimetry), total EE (TEE; doubly labeled water), and fasting leptin and total PYY before and after weight loss were measured. RESULTS: Both interventions yielded significant decreases in weight, FFM, REE, and leptin, whereas a significant time × group interaction was noted for FM (greater decrease in FM in the diet+resistance training group) (P < .05 for all outcomes). No significant differences in TEE, physical activity EE, and PYY were noted between baseline and after the intervention. Age, FFM, leptin, and PYY were the best predictors of baseline REE (R(2) = 0.77; P = .0001), whereas age, FFM, and FM were associated with REE after the intervention (R(2) = 0.88; P = .0001). The same predictors, except for leptin, were significantly related to TEE at baseline (R(2) = 0.70; P = .0001) and after the intervention (R(2) = 0.29; P = .0001), whereas only PYY was a significant predictor of physical activity EE at baseline and after the intervention. Changes in FM and leptin accounted for 27% of the variance in ΔREE (P = .0001). Greater predicted vs measured REE was noted after the intervention (P = .02). However, Δ leptin and ΔPYY were not significant predictors of the differences between postintervention measurement and predicted REE. CONCLUSIONS: Δ Leptin and ΔFM were strong contributors to changes in REE. However, Δ leptin and ΔPYY were not significant predictors of the differences between predicted and measured REE after the intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & MetabolismSame topicRegulation of Appetite and ObesityFrench-language works237,207