MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2726419421 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igx004.2531

PREDICTORS OF INSULIN RESISTANCE IN COMMUNITY-DWELLING OLDER ADULTS OF THE NUAGE STUDY

2017· article· en· W2726419421 on OpenAlexaff
Joane Matta, Pierrette Gaudreau, Tamàs Fülöp, Isabelle J. Dionne, Daniel Tessier, Bryna Shatenstein, Hélène Payette, José A. Morais

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdiponectinInsulin resistanceLeptinInternal medicineBiomarkerMedicineEndocrinologyInsulinBody mass indexLogistic regressionResistinObesityBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We determined insulin resistant subjects over a 3-year period by trajectory analyses of the HOMA-IR in a sample of non-diabetic, participants of the NuAge Study. Muscle mass index and % body fat were derived from DXA and bioimpedance. Physical activity was assessed. Protein intakes were calculated. Serum biomarker profile included adiponectin, leptin, CRP, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-10, lipid profile, IGF-1 and IGFBP-3. Using path analysis without biomarkers, positive associations were observed for HOMA-IR score with MMI (β=0.42) and % body fat (β=0.094). Logistic regression without biomarkers provided only 3 significant predictors of insulin resistance: MMI [OR (95% CI): 1.72 (1.26–2.3)]; %body fat [1.18 (1.12–1.25)]; male sex [0.145 (0.04–0.45)]. When the biomarker profile was included, adiponectin [0.58 (0.35–0.95)], TNF-α [1.12 (1.00–1.23)] and leptin [2.92 (1.29–6.64)] were independent predictors of insulin resistance. Our analyses showed that positive association between muscle mass and HOMA-IR is likely mediated through higher levels of TNF-α and leptin and lower adiponectin.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in Aging→Same topicAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases→French-language works237,207→