The importance of gene–environment interactions in human obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The worldwide obesity epidemic has been mainly attributed to lifestyle changes. However, who becomes obese in an obesity-prone environment is largely determined by genetic factors. In the last 20 years, important progress has been made in the elucidation of the genetic architecture of obesity. In parallel with successful gene identifications, the number of gene-environment interaction (GEI) studies has grown rapidly. This paper reviews the growing body of evidence supporting gene-environment interactions in the field of obesity. Heritability, monogenic and polygenic obesity studies provide converging evidence that obesity-predisposing genes interact with a variety of environmental, lifestyle and treatment exposures. However, some skepticism remains regarding the validity of these studies based on several issues, which include statistical modelling, confounding, low replication rate, underpowered analyses, biological assumptions and measurement precision. What follows in this review includes (1) an introduction to the study of GEI, (2) the evidence of GEI in the field of obesity, (3) an outline of the biological mechanisms that may explain these interaction effects, (4) methodological challenges associated with GEI studies and potential solutions, and (5) future directions of GEI research. Thus far, this growing body of evidence has provided a deeper understanding of GEI influencing obesity and may have tremendous applications in the emerging field of personalized medicine and individualized lifestyle recommendations.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".