The Metabolic Profiles of Metabolically Healthy Obese and Metabolically Unhealthy Obese South African Adults over 10 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity is associated with an increased cardiometabolic risk, but some individuals maintain metabolically healthy obesity (MHO). The aims were to follow a cohort of black South African adults over a period of 10 years to determine the proportion of the group that maintained MHO over 10 years, and to compare the metabolic profiles of the metabolically healthy and metabolically unhealthy groups after the follow-up period. The participants were South African men (n = 275) and women (n = 642) from the North West province. The prevalence of obesity and the metabolic syndrome increased significantly. About half of the metabolically healthy obese (MHO) adults maintained MHO over 10 years, while 46% of the women and 43% of men became metabolically unhealthy overweight/obese (MUO) at the end of the study. The metabolic profiles of these MHO adults were similar to those of the metabolically healthy normal weight (MHNW) group in terms of most metabolic syndrome criteria, but they were more insulin resistant; their CRP, fibrinogen, and PAI-1act were higher and HDL-cholesterol was lower than the MHNW group. Although the metabolic profiles of the MUO group were less favourable than those of their counterparts, MHO is a transient state and is associated with increased cardiometabolic risk.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".