MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008392671 · doi:10.3390/ijerph17041320

The Association between Metabolically Healthy Obesity, Cardiovascular Disease, and All-Cause Mortality Risk in Asia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020· review· en· W3008392671 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ming-Yuan Huang, Mu-Yi Wang, Yu-Sheng Lin, Chien‐Ju Lin, Kai Lo, I-Jen Chang, Ting‐Yao Cheng, Szu-Ying Tsai, Hsin-Hao Chen, Chien‐Yu Lin, Shu‐Jung Liu, Kuo‐Liong Chien, Tzu‐Lin Yeh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOverweightUnderweightOdds ratioConfidence intervalMeta-analysisInternal medicineSubgroup analysisObesityPopulationDemographyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the association among metabolically healthy obesity (MHO), cardiovascular disease (CVD)risk, and all-cause mortality in the Asian population. We searched databases from inception to 16 November, 2019 and pooled data using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to the following comparison groups: MHNW (without overweight or underweight participants) and MHNO (non-obese, including overweight and underweight participants). Nineteen studies were included. The mean Newcastle–Ottawa Scale score was 7.8. Participants with MHO had a significantly higher CVD risk (odds ratio (OR) = 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.13–1.63) and significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.78–1.00) than the comparison group. Subgroup analyses revealed participants with MHO had a significantly higher CVD risk than MHNW participants (OR = 1.61; 95% CI = 1.24–2.08; I2 = 73%), but there was no significant difference compared with MHNO participants (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80–1.36; I2 = 68%). Participants with MHO had a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.78–0.88; I2 = 9%) than MHNO participants, but a borderline significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality than MHNW participants (OR = 1.30; 95% CI = 0.99–1.72; I2 = 0%). The CVD risk and all-cause mortality of the MHO group changed depending on the control group. Thus, future studies should select control groups carefully.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.030
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207