MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944719239 · doi:10.14740/jocmr3820

Relationship of Anthropometric Indices to Abdominal Body Composition: A Multi-Ethnic New Zealand Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study

2019· article· en· W2944719239 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aya Cervantes, Ruma G. Singh, Jin U. Kim, Steve V. DeSouza, Maxim S. Petrov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRoyal Society Te ApārangiRoyal Society
KeywordsMedicineWaistBody mass indexMagnetic resonance imagingAnthropometryPacific islandersAdipose tissueConfidence intervalDemographyOdds ratioInternal medicineRadiologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Conventional anthropometric indices (body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC)) have limitations, in part, due to ethnic differences in fat distribution. Assessment of abdominal body composition using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to gain deeper insights into the pathophysiology of diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases and metabolic syndrome, but the knowledge of abdominal volumes in indigenous populations is scarce. This study aimed to assess abdominal fat distribution and total abdominal volume using MRI in a multi-ethnic cohort that includes Maori (the indigenous people of New Zealand) and Pacific Islanders (PI). METHODS: MRI was used to quantify subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) volume, visceral adipose tissue (VAT) volume and total abdominal (TAb) volume by two independent raters in a blinded fashion. WC and BMI were also measured. Multinomial regression was used to compare the volumes between ethnic groups. Linear regression was used to investigate the ethnicity-specific associations between anthropometric indices and abdominal volumes. Three statistical models were built to adjust for age, sex, prediabetes/diabetes status and other covariates. RESULTS: A total of 87 individuals (37 Caucasians, 24 Maori/PI and 26 others) were studied. Maori/PI had a significantly higher VAT volume compared with Caucasians across all statistical models, with the highest odds ratio of 2.1 (95% confidence interval: 1.1 - 4.2; P = 0.026). SAT and TAb volumes did not differ significantly between the groups. WC explained up to 72.9% of variance in VAT volume among Maori/PI and up to 50.7% among Caucasians. BMI explained up to 67.6% of variance in VAT volume among Maori/PI and up to 52.1% among Caucasians. CONCLUSIONS: Greater visceral fat deposition among Maori/PI might go some way towards explaining the increased rates of metabolic disorders observed in this ethnic group. Conventional anthropometric indices do not correspond to the same abdominal volumes across different ethnic groups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.208
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations39
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207