Utility of current obesity thresholds in signaling diabetes risk in the James Bay Cree of <i>Eeyou Istchee</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The anthropometric thresholds signaling type 2 diabetes risk have not been well defined for Aboriginal communities. This study examined current thresholds in terms of ability to capture diabetes risk in the Cree of Eeyou Istchee in northern Quebec, Canada. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study cohort for this analysis included adult participants from the Nituuchischaayihtitaau Aschii Multi-Community Environment and Health Study with complete data on anthropometric measures, fasting glucose, and insulin. Diabetes risk was defined as Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) value >2. Positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR, NLR) of existing obesity thresholds were evaluated (WHO; International Diabetes Federation, IDF; Adult Treatment Panel III, ATP III). Receiver operating curves were examined to estimate optimal thresholds. In a sensitivity analysis, diabetes risk was defined as HOMA-IR >2.7. RESULTS: The WHO 30 kg/m(2) body mass index (BMI) threshold performed well in women (PLR 5.56, 95% CI 1.95 to 15.9; NLR 0.24, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.31) and men (PLR 7.51, 95% CI 2.94 to 19.2; NLR 0.33, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.41). It was close to the estimated optimal threshold (28.5 kg/m(2)). The ATP III waist circumference threshold (102 cm) performed well in men (PLR 4.64, 95% CI 2.47 to 8.71; NLR 0.21, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.28) and was close to the estimated optimal threshold (101 cm). With diabetes risk defined at HOMA-IR >2.7, PLR values were slightly lower with narrower 95% CIs and optimal thresholds were slightly higher; PLR values remained above 3. For other current thresholds, estimated optimal values were higher and none had a PLR above 2. CONCLUSIONS: A BMI of 30 kg/m(2) in women and men, and a 102 cm waist circumference in men, are meaningful obesity thresholds in this Aboriginal population. Other thresholds require a further evaluation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".