MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794997744 · doi:10.1002/jbm4.10048

Bone Health After Bariatric Surgery

2018· review· en· W2794997744 on OpenAlexafffund
Claudia Gagnon, Anne L. Schafer

Bibliographic record

VenueJBMR Plus · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthDiabetes CanadaNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesDiabète Québec
KeywordsMedicineQuantitative computed tomographySleeve gastrectomyBiliopancreatic DiversionWeight lossBone mineralAppendicular skeletonBone remodelingSurgeryRadiologyObesityOsteoporosisGastric bypassInternal medicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Bariatric surgery results in long‐term weight loss and improvement or resolution in obesity‐related comorbidities. However, mounting evidence indicates that it adversely affects bone health. This review summarizes clinical research findings about the impact of bariatric surgery on skeletal outcomes. The literature is the largest and strongest for the Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass (RYGB) procedure, as RYGB was the most commonly performed bariatric procedure worldwide until it was very recently overtaken by the sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Because SG is a newer procedure, its skeletal effects have not yet been well defined. Epidemiologic studies have now demonstrated an increased risk of fracture after RYGB and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch, both of which include a malabsorptive component. As these epidemiologic data have emerged, patient‐oriented studies have elucidated the bone tissue‐level changes that may account for the heightened skeletal fragility. Bariatric surgery induces early and dramatic increases in biochemical markers of bone turnover. A notable feature of recent patient‐oriented clinical studies is the application of advanced skeletal imaging modalities; studies address the limitations of dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry (DXA) by using quantitative computed tomography (QCT)‐based modalities to examine volumetric bone mineral density and compartment‐specific density and microstructure. RYGB results in pronounced declines in bone mass at the axial skeleton demonstrated by DXA and QCT, as well as at the appendicular skeleton demonstrated by high‐resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR‐pQCT). RYGB has detrimental effects on trabecular and cortical microarchitecture and estimated bone strength. Skeletal changes after RYGB appear early and continue even after weight loss plateaus and weight stabilizes. The skeletal effects of bariatric surgery are presumably multifactorial, and mechanisms may involve nutritional factors, mechanical unloading, hormonal factors, and changes in body composition and bone marrow fat. Clinical guidelines address bone health and may mitigate the negative skeletal effects of surgery, although more research is needed to direct and support such guidelines. © 2018 The Authors. JBMR Plus is published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations177
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBMR PlusSame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207