Relationship between the metabolic syndrome and physical activity energy expenditure: a MONET study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to examine the association between the metabolic syndrome (MetS) and physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) in overweight and obese sedentary postmenopausal women. The study population consisted of 137 overweight and obese sedentary postmenopausal women (age, 57.7 +/- 4.8 years; BMI, 32.4 +/- 4.6 kg.m(-2)). Subjects had the MetS if 3 out of the following 5 criteria were met: visceral fat > 130 cm2, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol < 1.29 mmol.L(-1), fasting triglycerides > or = 1.7 mmol.L(-1), blood pressure > or = 130/85 mmHg, and fasting glucose > or =5.6 mmol.L(-1). We measured (i) body composition (by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry); (ii) visceral fat (by computed tomography); (iii) insulin sensitivity (using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp); (iv) plasma lipids, fasting glucose, and insulin, as well as 2 h glucose during an oral glucose tolerance test; (v) resting blood pressure; (vi) peak oxygen consumption (VO2 peak); (vii) PAEE (using doubly labeled water); and (viii) lower-body muscle strength (using weight-training equipment). Forty-two women (30.7%) had the MetS in our cohort. Individuals without the MetS had significantly higher levels of PAEE (962 +/- 296 vs. 837 +/- 271 kcal.d(-1); p < 0.05), VO2 peak (18.2 +/- 3.0 vs. 16.7 +/- 3.2 mL.min(-1).kg(-1); p < 0.05), and insulin sensitivity, as well as significantly lower levels of 2 h glucose and central lean body mass. No differences in total energy expenditure, resting metabolic rate, and muscle strength between groups were observed. Logistic regression analysis showed that 2 h glucose (odds ratio (OR): 1.50 (95% CI 1.17-1.92)), central lean body mass (OR: 1.17 (95% CI 1.05-1.31)), and PAEE (OR: 0.998 (95% CI 0.997-1.000)), but not VO2 peak and (or) muscle strength, were independent predictors of the MetS. Lower levels of PAEE and higher levels of 2 h glucose, as well as central lean body mass, are independent determinants of the MetS in our cohort of overweight and obese postmenopausal 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".