MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213056145 · doi:10.3389/fnut.2022.840209

The Interplay of Obesity, Dyslipidemia and Immune Dysfunction: A Brief Overview on Pathophysiology, Animal Models, and Nutritional Modulation

2022· review· en· W4213056145 on OpenAlexafffund
Yongbo She, Rabban Mangat, Sue Tsai, Spencer D. Proctor, Caroline Richard

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Nutrition · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship CouncilDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsDyslipidemiaContext (archaeology)Immune systemDiseaseObesityMedicineBioinformaticsNeuroscienceBiologyImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity has emerged as a leading global health concern. It is characterized by chronic low-grade inflammation, which impairs insulin signaling, lipid metabolism and immune function. Recent findings from animal and clinical studies have begun to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of immune dysfunction seen in the context of obesity. Here, we provide a brief review on the current understanding of the interplay between obesity, dyslipidemia and immunity. We also emphasize the advantages and shortcomings of numerous applicable research models including rodents and large animal swine that aim at unraveling the molecular basis of disease and clinical manifestations. Although there is no perfect model to answer all questions at once, they are often used to complement each other. Finally, we highlight some emerging nutritional strategies to improve immune function in the context of obesity with a particular focus on choline and foods that contains high amounts of choline.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.296
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations37
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NutritionSame topicAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic DiseasesFrench-language works237,207