MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164541735 · doi:10.1038/oby.2003.3

Adipose Tissue Quantification by Imaging Methods: A Proposed Classification

2003· review· en· W2164541735 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Shen, ZiMian Wang, Mark Punyanita, Jianbo Lei, Ahmet Sınav, John G. Kral, Celina Imielińska, Robert Ross, Steven B. Heymsfield

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Research · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsAdipose tissueCompartment (ship)PathologyMedicineBiologyComputational biologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advances in imaging techniques and understanding of differences in the molecular biology of adipose tissue has rendered classical anatomy obsolete, requiring a new classification of the topography of adipose tissue. Adipose tissue is one of the largest body compartments, yet a classification that defines specific adipose tissue depots based on their anatomic location and related functions is lacking. The absence of an accepted taxonomy poses problems for investigators studying adipose tissue topography and its functional correlates. The aim of this review was to critically examine the literature on imaging of whole body and regional adipose tissue and to create the first systematic classification of adipose tissue topography. Adipose tissue terminology was examined in over 100 original publications. Our analysis revealed inconsistencies in the use of specific definitions, especially for the compartment termed "visceral" adipose tissue. This analysis leads us to propose an updated classification of total body and regional adipose tissue, providing a well-defined basis for correlating imaging studies of specific adipose tissue depots with molecular processes.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0130.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations498
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity ResearchSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207