MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127780234 · doi:10.3390/jcm10040714

Factors Affecting Metabolic Outcomes Post Bariatric Surgery: Role of Adipose Tissue

2021· review· en· W3127780234 on OpenAlexaff
S. Keshavjee, Katherine J. P. Schwenger, Jitender Yadav, Timothy Jackson, Allan Okrainec, Johane P. Allard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDyslipidemiaObesityAdipose tissueInsulin resistanceDiabetes mellitusAffect (linguistics)Intensive care medicineMetabolic syndromeIntervention (counseling)SurgeryBioinformaticsInternal medicineEndocrinologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity is an ever-growing public health crisis, and bariatric surgery (BS) has become a valuable tool in ameliorating obesity, along with comorbid conditions such as diabetes, dyslipidemia and hypertension. BS techniques have come a long way, leading to impressive improvements in the health of the majority of patients. Unfortunately, not every patient responds optimally to BS and there is no method that is sufficient to pre-operatively predict who will receive maximum benefit from this surgical intervention. This review focuses on the adipose tissue characteristics and related parameters that may affect outcomes, as well as the potential influences of insulin resistance, BMI, age, psychologic and genetic factors. Understanding the role of these factors may help predict who will benefit the most from BS.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207