MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170542068 · doi:10.1139/h07-030

Epidemiological studies of exercise in diabetes prevention

2007· review· en· W2170542068 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gang Hu, Timo A. Lakka, Tuomas O. Kilpeläinen, Jaakko Tuomilehto

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusMedicineEpidemiologyDiseaseBody mass indexGerontologyPhysical fitnessPhysical activityPhysical exercisePublic healthClinical trialEnvironmental healthProspective cohort studyPhysical therapyInternal medicineEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Type 2 diabetes is one of the fastest growing public health problems in both developed and developing countries. It is estimated that the number of people with diabetes in the world will double in coming years, from 171 million in 2000 to 366 million in 2030. Cardiovascular disease accounts for more than 70% of total mortality among patients with type 2 diabetes. The associations of physical activity, physical fitness, and changes in the lifestyle with the risk of type 2 diabetes have been assessed by a number of prospective studies and clinical trials in the past decade. Several studies have also evaluated the joint associations of physical activity, body mass index, and glucose levels with the risk of type 2 diabetes. Prospective studies and clinical trials have shown that moderate or high levels of physical activity or physical fitness and changes in the lifestyle (dietary modification and increase in physical activity) can prevent type 2 diabetes. Our review of the scientific evidence confirms that 30 min/d of moderate- or high-level physical activity is an effective and safe way to prevent type 2 diabetes in all populations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations75
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207