Combined Influence of Waist and Hip Circumference on Risk of Death in a Large Cohort of European and Australian Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Waist circumference and hip circumference are both strongly associated with risk of death; however, their joint association has rarely been investigated. Methods and Results The MONICA Risk, Genetics, Archiving, and Monograph (MORGAM) Project was conducted in 30 cohorts from 11 countries; 90 487 men and women, aged 30 to 74 years, predominantly white, with no history of cardiovascular disease, were recruited in 1986 to 2010 and followed up for up to 24 years. Hazard ratios were estimated using sex‐specific Cox models, stratified by cohort, with age as the time scale. Models included baseline categorical obesity measures, age, total and high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol, systolic blood pressure , antihypertensive drugs, smoking, and diabetes mellitus. A total of 9105 all‐cause deaths were recorded during a median follow‐up of 10 years. Hazard ratios for all‐cause death presented J‐ or U‐shaped associations with most obesity measures. With waist and hip circumference included in the same model, for all hip sizes, having a smaller waist was strongly associated with lower risk of death, except for men with the smallest hips. In addition, among those with smaller waists, hip size was strongly negatively associated with risk of death, with ≈20% more people identified as being at increased risk compared with waist circumference alone. Conclusions A more complex relationship between hip circumference, waist circumference, and risk of death is revealed when both measures are considered simultaneously. This is particularly true for individuals with smaller waists, where having larger hips was protective. Considering both waist and hip circumference in the clinical setting could help to best identify those at increased risk of death.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".