MétaCan
← all works

Body Muscle-to-Fat Ratio, Rather Than Fat-to-Muscle Ratio, Significantly Correlates With Measured Insulin Resistance in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

2021· article· en· 7 citations· W3186470425 on OpenAlex· 10.14740/jocmr4401

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian venueIt was published in a Canadian venue.

No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame — the usual design — would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

The three-model screen

all 1,000 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: venue_new · design weight: 2684.25 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Clinical study comparing body composition indices against measured insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

This clinical study compares body composition measures of insulin resistance, not research.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Clinical correlation of body composition ratios with insulin resistance in T2DM.

Abstract

Background: Insulin resistance (IR) assessment is important in treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We thus compared body muscle-to-fat ratio (BMFR) and fat-to-muscle ratio (FMR) values against M/I values as clinical index of IR. Methods: Subject included 118 untreated T2DM patients. Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp examination was performed to calculate the M/I as index of IR. Body composition was measured by impedance analysis using InBody770. Results: Simple linear regression analyses confirmed correlations between M/I and BMFR (B: 0.756 (P < 0.01), coefficients of determination (R 2 ): 0.572, mean absolute error (MAE): 3.19, and root mean squared error (RMSE): 4.14), and between M/I and FMR (B: -0.601 (P < 0.01), R 2 : 0.362, MAE: 3.97, and RMSE: 5.05). Against the M/I values, BMFR also showed better goodness-of-fit than did FMR. In comparing correlation coefficients, the BMFR absolute B value was significantly larger than that of FMR (P = 0.027). Conclusions: BMFR is more useful than FMR in quantifying IR in patients with T2DM because the correlation between BMFR and the insulin sensitivity index M/I is significantly greater than that between FMR and M/I. J Clin Med Res. 2021;13(7):387-391 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jocmr4401

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

The record

Venue
Journal of Clinical Medicine Research
Topic
Nutrition and Health in Aging
Field
Medicine
Canadian institutions
Funders
Keywords
Insulin resistanceMedicineInternal medicineType 2 Diabetes MellitusEndocrinologyBody mass indexDiabetes mellitusMean squared errorInsulinMathematicsStatistics
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes