A systematic review of genetic syndromes with obesity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Syndromic monogenic obesity typically follows Mendelian patterns of inheritance and involves the co-presentation of other characteristics, such as mental retardation, dysmorphic features and organ-specific abnormalities. Previous reviews on obesity have reported 20 to 30 syndromes but no systematic review has yet been conducted on syndromic obesity. We searched seven databases using terms such as 'obesity', 'syndrome' and 'gene' to conduct a systematic review of literature on syndromic obesity. Our literature search identified 13,719 references. After abstract and full-text review, 119 relevant papers were eligible, and 42 papers were identified through additional searches. Our analysis of these 161 papers found that 79 obesity syndromes have been reported in literature. Of the 79 syndromes, 19 have been fully genetically elucidated, 11 have been partially elucidated, 27 have been mapped to a chromosomal region and for the remaining 22, neither the gene(s) nor the chromosomal location(s) have yet been identified. Interestingly, 54.4% of the syndromes have not been assigned a name, whereas 13.9% have more than one name. We report on organizational inconsistencies (e.g. naming discrepancies and syndrome classification) and provide suggestions for improvements. Overall, this review illustrates the need for increased clinical and genetic research on syndromes with obesity.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it