MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135840773 · doi:10.22088/cjim.12.1.59

White blood cell count and clustered components of metabolic syndrome: A study in western Iran.

2021· article· en· W3135840773 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad-Taghi Hedayati, Mahdi Montazeri, Negin Rashidi, Elham Yousefi-Abdolmaleki, Mohammad A. Shafiee, Ali Maleki, Maryam Farmani, Mohammad Montazeri

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease Prognosis
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetabolic syndromeMedicineWhite blood cellQuartileInternal medicinePopulation studyAnalysis of variancePopulationComplete blood countGastroenterologyObesityConfidence intervalEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: White blood cell count (WBC) is one of the objective parameters of systemic inflammation. The aim of present study was to evaluate the relationship between WBC count and metabolic syndrome. METHODS: In this study on Lor population in Borujerd province (West of Iran), from 2011 to 2013, 800 persons were enrolled. MetS was defined based on ATP III criteria. Differences among the quartiles of WBC were examined by one-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: Only 14.7% did not have any of the five components and 43% of all subjects had metabolic syndrome. The means of WBC count in MetS group were significantly higher than the control group (p<0.0001). In subjects without any MetS components, the means of WBC was 5.321 /µL, and it was 5.664, 5.714, 5.961, 6.302, and 6.572 /µL in subjects with 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 components, respectively. These differences show a significant increasing trend (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: WBC count was associated with clustered components of metabolic syndrome. It seems that WBC counts could be considered as a predictive factor for metabolic syndrome in preventive medicine.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease PrognosisFrench-language works237,207