MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of the Obesity Epidemic on Cancer

2014· review· en· W2155836315 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Medicine · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObesityCancerEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing appreciation that the current obesity epidemic is associated with increases in cancer incidence at a population level and may lead to poor cancer outcomes; concurrent decreases in cancer mortality at a population level may represent a paradox, i.e., they may also reflect improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer that mask obesity effects. An association of obesity with cancer is biologically plausible because adipose tissue is biologically active, secreting estrogens, adipokines, and cytokines. In obesity, adipose tissue reprogramming may lead to insulin resistance, with or without diabetes, and it may contribute to cancer growth and progression locally or through systemic effects. Obesity-associated changes impact cancer in a complex fashion, potentially acting directly on cells through pathways, such as the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) and Janus kinase-signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK-STAT) pathways, or indirectly via changes in the tumor microenvironment. Approaches to obesity management are discussed, and the potential for pharmacologic interventions that target the obesity-cancer link is addressed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.681
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.417 · 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