Metabolic risk factors clustering among adolescents: a comparison between sex, age and socioeconomic status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim was to compare the metabolic risk factors (MRF) between sex, age and socioeconomic status in a sample of adolescents from Curitiba, Brazil. A cross-sectional school-based study was conducted on 997 adolescents (429 boys) aged 12-17 years old from public schools. Total Cholesterol (TC), LDL-c, HDL-c, Triglycerides, Glycemia, Blood Pressure, waist circumference and body mass index were measured. Sex, age and socioeconomic status information was obtained using a questionnaire. Descriptive analyses, Fisher Exact and Chi-Square Tests were used to establish the sample's characteristics and the MRF comparison between variables. We found that 27.4% were classified as overweight/obese, almost half of them had TC and LDL-c classified as limitrophe/altered, with a difference between the sexes (p < 0.01), and that a higher percentage of altered values was seen among girls. The percentage of 3 and 4 or more MRF was 13.8% and 6.3%, respectively. In addition, 86.5% of the participants had at least one and 39.7% had at least two MRF. We conclude that there was a high percentage of overweight/obese, as well as a great number of subjects with altered TC and HDL-c. We also pointed out the large percentage of aggregated metabolic risk factors in both sexes. Strategies to reduce metabolic risk factors are required.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".