MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003595730 · doi:10.1002/jcsm.12520

A counterintuitive perspective for the role of fat‐free mass in metabolic health

2020· article· en· W3003595730 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean‐Christophe Lagacé, Martin Brochu, Isabelle J. Dionne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cachexia Sarcopenia and Muscle · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsCounterintuitiveContext (archaeology)Perspective (graphical)Fat free massPopulationPsychological interventionMedicineFat massEnvironmental healthBiologyObesityEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fat-free mass (FFM) has long been recognized to play a role in metabolic homeostasis. Over the years, it has become widely accepted by the scientific and general community alike that having a greater FFM can be protective for metabolic health. Hence, in the context of an aging population concurrently facing sarcopenia and an elevated incidence of metabolic diseases, substantial efforts are being made to study and develop interventions aiming to maintain or increase FFM. However, accumulating evidence now suggests that a large FFM may be deleterious to metabolic health, at least in some populations. The objective of this article is thus to raise awareness surrounding these results and to explore possible explanations and mechanisms underlying this counterintuitive association.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.015
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations28
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cachexia Sarcopenia and MuscleSame topicDiet and metabolism studiesFrench-language works237,207