Metabolic syndrome is associated with similar long-term prognosis in those living with and without obesity: an analysis of 45 615 patients from the nationwide LIPIDOGRAM 2004–2015 studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the association between metabolic syndrome (MetS) and long-term all-cause mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: The LIPIDOGRAM studies were carried out in the primary care in Poland in 2004, 2006, and 2015. MetS was diagnosed based on the National Cholesterol Education Program, Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP/ATP III), and Joint Interim Statement (JIS) criteria. The cohort was divided into four groups: non-obese patients without MetS, obese patients without MetS, non-obese patients with MetS, and obese patients with MetS. Differences in all-cause mortality were analysed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. A total of 45 615 participants were enrolled (mean age 56.3, standard deviation: 11.8 years; 61.7% female). MetS was diagnosed in 14 202 (31%) by NCEP/ATP III criteria and 17 216 (37.7%) by JIS criteria. Follow-up was available for 44 620 (97.8%, median duration 15.3 years) patients. MetS was associated with increased mortality risk among the obese {hazard ratio, HR: 1.88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.79-1.99] and HR: 1.93 [95% CI 1.82-2.04], according to NCEP/ATP III and JIS criteria, respectively} and non-obese individuals [HR: 2.11 (95% CI 1.85-2.40) and 1.7 (95% CI 1.56-1.85) according to NCEP/ATP III and JIS criteria, respectively]. Obese patients without MetS had a higher mortality risk than non-obese patients without MetS [HR: 1.16 (95% CI 1.10-1.23) and HR: 1.22 (95% CI 1.15-1.30), respectively in subgroups with NCEP/ATP III and JIS criteria applied]. CONCLUSIONS: MetS is associated with increased all-cause mortality risk in non-obese and obese patients. In patients without MetS, obesity remains significantly associated with mortality. The concept of metabolically healthy obesity should be revised.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".