MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4210611217 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-05236-5

The triponderal mass index as a measure of adiposity in pediatric survivors of acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a cross-sectional study

2022· article· en· W4210611217 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alissa W. Zhang, John Wiernikowski, Carol Portwine, Lehana Thabane, M. Constantine Samaan

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonImpactSt Joseph's Health CentreMcMaster Children's HospitalMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBody mass indexObesityPopulationCross-sectional studyChildhood obesityInternal medicinePediatricsOverweight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is the most common type of childhood cancer. Treatments of ALL predispose survivors to obesity, which increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and diabetes. The hallmark of obesity is excess fat mass, and adiposity is a superior predictor of cardiometabolic risk when compared to Body Mass Index (BMI), yet clinical measures of adiposity in children are lacking. The Tri-Ponderal Mass Index (TMI) (kg/m3) is a more accurate adiposity measure compared to BMI z-score in the general pediatric population. This cross-sectional study aimed to validate TMI as an adiposity measure against DEXA scan-derived adiposity, and to compare it to BMI z-score, in pediatric ALL survivors. This study was a retrospective chart review of pediatric ALL survivors diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 at McMaster Children’s Hospital, a tertiary pediatric center in Ontario, Canada. One hundred and thirteen patients (Female n = 55, 48.70%) were included, and adiposity was measured using DEXA scans. Exploratory partial correlations and linear regression analyses were adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, and ALL risk status. Both TMI and BMI z-score correlated with the DEXA-measured fat mass percentage (FM%) (partial correlation TMI versus FM% r = 0.56; p value < 0.0001; BMI z-score versus FM% r = 0.55; p value < 0.0001). In regression analyses, the association of TMI was not inferior to BMI z-score in assessing adiposity (TMI versus FM% estimated unstandardized B 0.80, 95% CI 0.56, 1.02; p value < 0.0001; BMI z-score versus FM% (unstandardized B 0.37, 95% CI 0.26, 0.49; p value < 0.0001). The TMI is a useful clinical adiposity-specific measure in survivors of pediatric ALL.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→