Endothelial vasodilator function in normal-weight adults with metabolic syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metabolic syndrome (MetS) typically presents with obesity; however, obesity is not a requisite characteristic for MetS classification and related vascular risk. We tested the hypothesis that MetS, independent of excess adiposity, is associated with impaired endothelial vasodilator dysfunction. Thirty-two sedentary, middle-aged adults were studied: 11 normal weight (9 male and 2 female; body mass index (BMI), 24.0 ± 0.3 kg/m2); 11 normal weight with MetS (9 male and 2 female; BMI, 24.7 ± 0.3 kg/m2); and 10 obese without MetS (8 male and 2 female; BMI, 31.4 ± 0.5 kg/m2). MetS was established according to National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III criteria. Forearm blood flow (FBF) responses to intra-arterial infusions of acetylcholine and sodium nitroprusside were measured via strain-gauge plethysmography. FBF responses to acetylcholine were ∼20% lower (P < 0.05) in the normal-weight subjects with MetS (from 4.0 ± 0.3 to 13.0 ± 1.0 mL/(100 mL tissue·min)) and obese subjects (from 4.8 ± 0.2 to 12.2 ± 1.1 mL/(100 mL tissue·min)) compared with the normal-weight subjects (from 4.6 ± 0.4 to 15.8 ± 0.7 mL/(100 mL tissue·min)). Of note, FBF responses to acetylcholine were similar between the normal-weight adults with MetS and the obese adults. There were no differences among groups in FBF response to sodium nitroprusside. These data indicate that the presence of MetS, independent of obesity, is associated with diminished endothelium-dependent vasodilation. Endothelial vasodilator dysfunction may underlie the increased cardiovascular risk in normal-weight adults with MetS.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".