Relation of insulin resistance with social-demographics, adiposity and behavioral factors in non-diabetic adult Canadians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Insulin resistance is a pathogenic factor for type II diabetes and has been associated with metabolic abnormalities and adverse clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between insulin resistance and socio-demographics, adiposity and behavioral factors in the general, non-diabetic adult Canadian population. METHODS: Data for 3515 non-diabetic adults aged 18 to 79 years from the Canadian Health Measures Survey (cycles 1 and 2, 2007-2011) were analyzed. Insulin resistance index was measured by the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), and insulin resistance (IR) was defined as individuals in the highest quartile of the HOMA-IR index. Logistic regression models were used to examine the effect of demographics, lifestyle factors and adiposity measurements on HOMA-IR. RESULTS: The risk of IR increased with age, particularly in men. Individuals had adjusted odds ratio (OR) (with corresponding 95 % confidence interval) of 5.97 (2.90-8.52) and 25.12 (15.20-41.51) associated with a body-mass-index (BMI) between 25.0 and < 30.0, or ≥30.0, of 9.23 (6.52-13.07) with abdominal obesity (waist circumstance ≥102 cm for men and ≥ 88 cm for women), of 8.72 (6.13-12.39) with a high waist-to-height ratio (>0.57), and of 6.30 (4.33-9.16) with a high waist-to-hip ratio (>0.90 for men and >0.85 for women). Physically inactive people and non-alcohol consumer also had a significantly higher odd of IR. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that men and older, obese and physically inactive people were at increased risk for IR. Adiposity indices including BMI, waist circumstance, waist-to-height ratio and waist-to-hip ratio were highly associated with IR with similar magnitude of association.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".