MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310526916 · doi:10.1111/obr.13520

Obesity in South and Southeast Asia—A new consensus on care and management

2022· review· en· W4310526916 on OpenAlexaff
Kwang Wei Tham, Rohana Abdul Ghani, Chaicharn Deerochanawong, Mia Fojas, Samantha Hocking, June Lee, Tran Quang Nam, Faruque Pathan, Banshi Saboo, Sidartawan Soegondo, Noel Somasundaram, Alice Moi Ling Yong, John Ashkenas, Nicola J. Webster, Brian J. Oldfield

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Reviews · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsNorth Toronto Eye CareInnovative Medicines Canada
FundersServierMonash UniversityNovo NordiskSanofiAstraZenecaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsObesityMedicineSoutheast asiaHealth careStigma (botany)Environmental healthMEDLINEWeight managementFamily medicineGerontologyWeight lossEconomic growthPolitical sciencePathologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity is a chronic disease in which the abnormal or excessive accumulation of body fat leads to impaired health and increased risk of mortality and chronic health complications. Prevalence of obesity is rising rapidly in South and Southeast Asia, with potentially serious consequences for local economies, healthcare systems, and quality of life. Our group of obesity specialists from Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Viet Nam undertook to develop consensus recommendations for management and care of adults and children with obesity in South and Southeast Asia. To this end, we identified and researched 12 clinical questions related to obesity. These questions address the optimal approaches for identifying and staging obesity, treatment (lifestyle, behavioral, pharmacologic, and surgical options) and maintenance of reduced weight, as well as issues related to weight stigma and patient engagement in the clinical setting. We achieved consensus on 42 clinical recommendations that address these questions. An algorithm describing obesity care is presented, keyed to the various consensus recommendations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.217
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations165
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity ReviewsSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207