0114 The Association Between Body Fat Percentage and the Feeling of Satiety After A Meal Following Sleep Loss in Young Healthy Individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies in obese individuals have shown that the feeling of satiety after a meal varies according to their body fat percentage (BF%), but this association is not present when they are well rested. Other studies have shown that sleep restriction (SR) is associated with an increase in energy intake. The objective of this study was to verify whether the feeling of satiety after a meal following sleep loss is associated with BF% in healthy individuals. Eighteen young healthy subjects (12 men and 6 women; 18-33y) completed an X-Ray scan measuring the BF% via biophotonic absorption. Participants completed a visual analog scale (VAS) measuring their desire to eat after having breakfast following three counterbalanced sleep conditions: a control condition (habitual bedtime and wake-time), a 50% SR with a delayed bedtime and a 50% SR with an advanced wake time. Pearson correlations between the VAS score and the BF% were computed for all sleep conditions separately. The average BF% of the population was 18,8%, showing a relatively very healthy sample. In the control sleep condition, results showed no relationship between the desire to eat after breakfast and BF% (r=-.36, p=.14). However, the desire to eat after breakfast was significantly correlated with BF% in both the advanced wake time and the delayed bedtime conditions (r=.53, p<.05; r=.64, p<.01, respectively). These results suggest that even in a healthy population, the relative amount of body fat is associated with the feeling of satiety after a meal following sleep deprivation. This could be due to the hormonal changes after sleep loss. Indeed, it has been shown that ghrelin levels are associated with BF%, and that sleep restriction is associated with an increase in ghrelin levels. Further studies should focus on verifying the differences in ghrelin levels of individuals with different bf% in similar conditions. No
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".