Ethnicity and Metabolic Syndrome: Implications for Assessment, Management and Prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a constellation of cardiometabolic risk factors that identifies people at increased risk for type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. While the global prevalence is 20%-25% of the adult population, the prevalence varies across different racial/ethnic populations. In this narrative review, evidence is reviewed regarding the assessment, management and prevention of MetS among people of different racial/ethnic groups. The most popular definition of MetS considers race/ethnicity for assessing waist circumference given differences in visceral adipose tissue and cardiometabolic risk. However, defining race/ethnicity may pose challenges in the clinical setting. Despite 80% of the world's population being of non-European descent, the majority of research on management and prevention has focused on European-derived populations. In these studies, lifestyle management has proven an effective therapy for reversal of MetS, and randomised studies are underway in specific racial/ethnic groups. Given the large number of people at risk for MetS, prevention efforts need to focus at community and population levels. Community-based interventions have begun to show promise, and efforts to improve lifestyle behaviours through alterations in the built environment may be another avenue. However, careful consideration needs to be given to take into account the unique cultural context of the target race/ethnic group.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".