Adiposity measures and their validity in estimating risk of hypertension in South Asian children: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Given the South Asian phenotype of higher body fat at similar body mass index (BMI) relative to Caucasians, we sought to explore the association between prominent adiposity indicators with blood pressure (BP) and hypertension, to compare the accuracy of these indicators in estimating hypertension, and to provide cut-off values associated with adverse hypertension risk in South Asian children. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Community-based recruitment in two Canadian cities (Hamilton and Surrey). PARTICIPANTS: South Asian children (n=762) were recruited from two Canadian cities. Waist circumference, waist to height ratio and BMI were determined. Body fat percentage was assessed by bioelectrical impedance analysis and BP was assessed using an automated device. All variables (except body fat percentage) were transformed to z-scores using published standards. OUTCOME MEASURES: Linear and Poisson regression was used to explore associations between the adiposity indicators with BP z-score and hypertension. Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was used to explore the strength of the adiposity indicators in estimating hypertension risk and sex-stratified optimal adiposity cut-off values associated with hypertension risk. RESULTS: Significant associations were detected in adjusted and unadjusted models between the adiposity indicators with BP z-score and hypertension (p<0.01 for all). The area under the curve (AUC) values for the adiposity indicators for boys and girls ranged from 0.74 to 0.80, suggesting that the adiposity indicators are fair measures of estimating hypertension risk. Sex-stratified cut-off associated with adverse risk of hypertension for girls and boys, respectively, were at the 92nd and 82nd percentile for BMI z-scores, 65th and 80th percentile for WC z-score, 63rd and 67th percentile for WHtR z-score and at 29.8% and 23.5% for body fat. CONCLUSION: Our results show associations between adiposity indicators with BP and hypertension and suggests that South Asian children might be at adverse risk of hypertension at levels of adiposity considered normal.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".