Obesity Measurement Index Is Associated With Hemoglobin A1c Level in Young Adult Without Diabetes: A Single-Center Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Obesity is a public health problem in the world, which can lead to several risks of cardiovascular events, such as, diabetes mellitus type 2 and respiratory disorders. This study aimed to analyze the obesity measurements index and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in young adults without diabetes. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted from February to March 2021 at the Hasanuddin University Hospital, Makassar, Indonesia. Ninety-nine subjects were included in this study. Obesity measurement index (body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, body fat percentage) and HbA1c level were measured for each subject. Statistical tests were performed using SPSS 22.0. Results: There was a significant correlation between BMI and HbA1c (P < 0.001). Also, waist circumference and body fat percentage in women group were significantly correlated with HbA1c (P = 0.002 and 0.045, respectively). Conclusions: Obesity measurement index is positively correlated with HbA1c levels in young adult without diabetes. So, the obesity measurement index can be used to determine the risk of diabetes mellitus J Endocrinol Metab. 2022;12(4-5):140-145 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jem823
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".