MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172212041 · doi:10.1177/1059840510376383

Acanthosis Nigricans Among Northern Plains American Indian Children

2010· article· en· W2172212041 on OpenAlexaff
Blakely Brown, Curtis W. Noonan, Bonnie Bentley, Kathrene Conway, Mary Corcoran, Kris FourStar, Shannon Gress, Sharon Wagner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of School Nursing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsCree Board of Health and Social Services of James Bay
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcanthosis nigricansBody mass indexFamily historyMedicineObesityContext (archaeology)Diabetes mellitusInsulin resistancePopulationConfidence intervalDemographyGerontologyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthEndocrinologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to present cross-sectional and prospective data on acanthosis nigricans (AN) prevalence in the context of other risk factors for diabetes including high body mass index (BMI), abnormal blood pressure (BP), physical inactivity and family history of diabetes among Northern Plains American Indian (AI) children. Standardized health measures were collected in 2,520 K-12th-grade AI students for AN, BMI, and BP. Data were also collected on family history of diabetes and physical activity. Approximately, 9.7% of the participants were positive for AN. AN was associated with high BMI, abnormal BP, and diabetes family history. Sports participation was inversely associated with AN. Among children measured the prior year, relative risk (and 95% confidence interval [CI]) for obesity and incident AN was 9.8 (4.2-23.0) compared to normal weight. These findings suggest there is utility in measuring this marker of insulin resistance in this at-risk population.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of School NursingSame topicCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseFrench-language works237,207