Sarcopenic Obesity Phenotypes in Patients With HIV: Implications for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe prevalence, incidence, and risk factors for sarcopenic obesity (SO) phenotypes in people living with HIV (PWH) and their association with subclinical cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: . These variables combined generated 5 SO phenotypes: severe SO: low HG + low ASMI + low SPPB + high BMI; SO1: weak HG + high VAT; SO2: weak HG + high BMI; SO3: low ASMI + high VAT; SO4: low ASMI + high BMI. Subclinical CVD was defined as carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) ≥ 1 mm, presence of carotid plaque, or coronary artery calcification (CAC) score > 10. RESULTS: . Two PWH had severe SO. The prevalence of SO1-SO4 was 19.7%, 3.6%, 20.8% and 0.8%, respectively. Incidence of SO1-SO4 was 6.90, 1.2, 5.6, and 0.29 × 100 person-years, respectively. SO1 was associated with risk of IMT ≥ 1, and SO3 with risk of CAC score > 10. CONCLUSIONS: There was a large variability in incidence and prevalence of SO phenotypes. The presence of SO may have important implications for cardiovascular prevention and cardiac rehabilitation of PWH who suffered events.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".