MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2761686635 · doi:10.1111/obr.12604

Ethnic and population differences in the genetic predisposition to human obesity

2017· review· en· W2761686635 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Reviews · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsEthnic groupObesityGenetic predispositionHeritabilityRace (biology)MedicinePopulationMissing heritability problemDemographyEnvironmental healthGeneticsBiologyDiseaseGenetic variantsGenotypePathologySociologyGeneAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity rates have escalated to the point of a global pandemic with varying prevalence across ethnic groups. These differences are partially explained by lifestyle factors in addition to genetic predisposition to obesity. This review provides a comprehensive examination of the ethnic differences in the genetic architecture of obesity. Using examples from evolution, heritability, admixture, monogenic and polygenic studies of obesity, we provide explanations for ethnic differences in the prevalence of obesity. The debate over definitions of race and ethnicity, the advantages and limitations of multi-ethnic studies and future directions of research are also discussed. Multi-ethnic studies have great potential to provide a better understanding of ethnic differences in the prevalence of obesity that may result in more targeted and personalized obesity treatments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.255 · 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