Patterns of body mass index milestones in early life and cardiometabolic risk in early adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the independent and combined relationships of body mass index (BMI) peak and rebound with adiposity, insulin resistance and metabolic risk later in life. We used data from Project Viva, a well-characterized birth cohort from Boston with repeated measures of BMI, to help fill this gap. METHODS: Among 1681 children with BMI data from birth to mid childhood, we fitted individual BMI trajectories using mixed-effects models with natural cubic splines and estimated age, and magnitude of BMI, at peak (in infancy) and rebound (in early childhood). We obtained cardiometabolic measures of the children in early adolescence (median 12.9 years) and analysed their associations with the BMI parameters. RESULTS: After adjusting for potential confounders, age and magnitude at infancy BMI peak were associated with greater adolescent adiposity, and earlier adiposity rebound was strongly associated with greater adiposity, insulin resistance and metabolic risk score independently of BMI peak. Children with a normal timing of BMI peak plus early rebound had an adverse cardiometabolic profile, characterized by higher fat mass index {β 2.2 kg/m2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6, 2.9]}, trunk fat mass index [1.1 kg/m2 (0.8, 1.5)], insulin resistance [0.2 units (0.04, 0.4)] and metabolic risk score [0.4 units (0.2, 0.5)] compared with children with a normal BMI peak and a normal rebound pattern. Children without a BMI peak (no decline in BMI after the rise in infancy) also had adverse adolescent metabolic profiles. CONCLUSIONS: Early age at BMI rebound is a strong risk factor for cardiometabolic risk, independent of BMI peak. Children with a normal peak-early rebound pattern, or without any BMI decline following infancy, are at greatest risk of adverse cardiometabolic profile in adolescence. Routine monitoring of BMI may help to identify children who are at greatest risk of developing an adverse cardiometabolic profile in later life and who may be targeted for preventive interventions.
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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".