Association of muscle fiber type with measures of obesity: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity derives from an extended period of positive energy imbalance due to a complex interplay of environmental and biological factors. Muscle fiber type and physiology have been hypothesized to affect metabolism and energy expenditure and thus to affect an individual's propensity to gain weight. However, there have been conflicting reports regarding a relationship between muscle fiber type and obesity. Here, we systematically reviewed literature investigating this topic from PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Of these, 32 articles were included in our final review and analysis. Most studies (22/32) reported a significant relationship between muscle fiber-type proportion and a measure of obesity. Overall, there was a significant negative relationship between the proportion of type I fibers and body mass index (BMI) and a significant positive relationship between the proportion of type IIX fibers and BMI. Moreover, between-group comparisons indicated a greater prevalence of type IIX fibers and a lower prevalence of type I fibers in patients living with obesity relative to lean individuals. These significant relationships were confirmed in a meta-analysis of these data. The causal nature of these associations remains to be evaluated.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".