Perspectives and challenges of epigenetic determinants of childhood obesity: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tremendous increase in childhood obesity prevalence over the last few decades cannot merely be explained by genetics and evolutionary changes in the genome, implying that gene-environment interactions, such as epigenetic modifications, likely play a major role. This systematic review aims to summarize the evidence of the association between epigenetics and childhood obesity. A literature search was performed via PubMed and Scopus engines using a combination of terms related to epigenetics and pediatric obesity. Articles studying the association between epigenetic mechanisms (including DNA methylation and hydroxymethylation, non-coding RNAs, and chromatin and histones modification) and obesity and/or overweight (or any related anthropometric parameters) in children (0-18 years) were included. The risk of bias was assessed with a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomized studies. One hundred twenty-one studies explored epigenetic changes related to childhood obesity. DNA methylation was the most widely investigated mechanism (N = 101 studies), followed by non-coding RNAs (N = 19 studies) with evidence suggestive of an association with childhood obesity for DNA methylation of specific genes and microRNAs (miRNAs). One study, focusing on histones modification, was identified. Heterogeneity of findings may have hindered more insights into the epigenetic changes related to childhood obesity. Gaps and challenges that future research should face are herein described.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".