Obesity-Related Neuroinflammation: Magnetic Resonance and Microscopy Imaging of the Brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity is a major risk factor of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. The principal feature of dementia is a loss of neurons and brain atrophy. The mechanistic links between obesity and the neurodegenerative processes of dementias are not fully understood, but recent research suggests that obesity-related systemic inflammation and subsequent neuroinflammation may be involved. Adipose tissues release multiple proinflammatory molecules (fatty acids and cytokines) that impact blood and vessel cells, inducing low-grade systemic inflammation that can transition to tissues, including the brain. Inflammation in the brain-neuroinflammation-is one of key elements of the pathobiology of neurodegenerative disorders; it is characterized by the activation of microglia, the resident immune cells in the brain, and by the structural and functional changes of other cells forming the brain parenchyma, including neurons. Such cellular changes have been shown in animal models with direct methods, such as confocal microscopy. In humans, cellular changes are less tangible, as only indirect methods such as magnetic resonance (MR) imaging are usually used. In these studies, obesity and low-grade systemic inflammation have been associated with lower volumes of the cerebral gray matter, cortex, and hippocampus, as well as altered tissue MR properties (suggesting microstructural variations in cellular and molecular composition). How these structural variations in the human brain observed using MR imaging relate to the cellular variations in the animal brain seen with microscopy is not well understood. This review describes the current understanding of neuroinflammation in the context of obesity-induced systemic inflammation, and it highlights need for the bridge between animal microscopy and human MR imaging studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".