Associations of birth weight, linear growth and relative weight gain throughout life with abdominal fat depots in adulthood: the 1982 Pelotas (Brazil) birth cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported on associations of size at birth and early growth with general and central obesity; however, few have examined the potential effects of birth weight and postnatal growth on separate abdominal fat compartments. We investigated the effects of size at birth, linear growth and relative weight gain from birth to adulthood on visceral (VFT) and subcutaneous abdominal (SAFT) fat thicknesses at age 30 years. METHODS: A total of 2663 participants from the 1982 Pelotas (Brazil) birth cohort study had complete information on ultrasound measures of abdominal fat at age 30 years, and anthropometric measurements for at least five visits (0/2/4/23/30 years). We estimated weight and height Z-score changes, conditional relative weight gain and conditional height at several ages. RESULTS: In both men and women, VFT and SAFT showed positive associations with conditional relative weight gain during all age periods beyond 2 years and birth, respectively (all P⩽0.01). Women born with intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) had greater VFT than other women (difference=0.15 s.d., 95% CI: 0.01-0.29), and they showed a stronger positive influence of infant weight gain 0-2 years on VFT (IUGR: β=0.17 s.d., 95% CI: 0.05-0.29; non-IUGR: β=0.01 s.d., 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.06; Pinteraction=0.02). Stunting at 2 years was associated with lower SAFT but not VFT, and it modified the influence of weight gain 2-4 years on SAFT in both sexes (both Pinteraction<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reinforce the advantages of being born with an appropriate birth weight, and the hazards of rapid postnatal gains in weight relative to linear growth, particularly after the critical window of the first 1000 days.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".