Cardiorespiratory Fitness Attenuates Metabolic-Associated Mortality Risk in Normal Weight, Overweight, and Obese Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
0928 The relationships among obesity, the metabolic syndrome, cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), and risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality are complex and not well understood. PURPOSE: To determine the impact of CRF on the CVD mortality risk associated with the metabolic syndrome in normal weight, overweight and obese men. METHODS: The sample included 19,173 adult male participants from the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study in Dallas, TX. All participants underwent a clinical examination including a maximal treadmill test to assess CRF. The metabolic syndrome was defined according to the Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines as having at least three of the following risk factors: waist circumference >102 cm, triglycerides ≥1.69 mmol/L, HDL-cholesterol <1.04 mmol/L, glucose ≥6.1 mmol/L, and high blood pressure (≥130 mmHg systolic or ≥85 mmHg diastolic). A total of 160 CVD deaths occurred over an average 10.2 years of follow-up. RESULTS: After adjustment for age, year of examination, smoking status, alcohol consumption, and parental CVD, the relative risks [95% confidence interval] of CVD mortality were 2.29 [1.02–5.14] in normal weight men, 1.92 [1.17–3.15] in overweight men, and 3.11 [1.87–5.18] in obese men with the metabolic syndrome by comparison to normal weight men who did not have the metabolic syndrome. After further adjustment for CRF, the relative risk estimate in each BMI category were greatly attenuated and were no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Cardiorespiratory fitness offers significant protection from CVD mortality associated with the metabolic syndrome and is independent of body weight status. Supported by grants AG06945 from the National Institute on Aging and T4945 from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".