MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2777912041 · doi:10.1101/234641

Central Role of Cognitive Control Networks in Weight Loss During Voluntary Calorie Restriction

2017· preprint· en· W2777912041 on OpenAlexafffund
Selin Neseliler, Wen Hu, Kevin Larcher, Maria Zacchia, Mahsa Dadar, Stephanie G. Scala, Marie Lamarche, Yashar Zeighami, Stephen Stotland, Maurice Larocque, Errol B. Marliss, Alain Dagher

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWeight lossLeptinCalorie restrictionGhrelinHormoneOverweightInternal medicineEndocrinologyCalorieReactivity (psychology)Food intakePsychologyObesityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Insufficient responses to hypocaloric diets have been attributed to hormonal adaptations that override self-control of food intake. We tested this hypothesis by measuring brain fMRI reactivity to food cues and circulating energy-balance hormones in 24 overweight/obese participants before, and 1 and 3 months after starting a calorie restriction diet. Increased activity in prefrontal regions at month 1 correlated with weight loss at months 1 and 3. Weight loss was also correlated with increased plasma ghrelin and decreased leptin at month 1, and these changes were associated with greater food cue reactivity in reward-related brain regions. However, the reduction in leptin did not counteract weight loss; indeed, it was correlated with further weight loss at month 3. Activation in a network of prefrontal regions associated with self-control could contribute to individual differences in weight loss and maintenance, whereas we failed to find that the hormonal adaptations play a major role.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicEating Disorders and Behaviors→French-language works237,207→