High glycemia and resistin normalized in children with double burden of malnutrition: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The coexistence of stunting and excess weight in the same individual is defined as a double burden of malnutrition (DBM) and is associated with noncommunicable diseases. In this study, we evaluated the impact of DBM on adipokine concentrations and metabolic profiles in children compared with weight excess alone. Children were allocated to the weight excess group ( n = 23) (height-for-age (HAZ) > 0.0 and < 2.0 Z-score and body mass index-for-age (BMI/A) > 1.0 Z-score) or DBM ( n = 22) group (HAZ < −1.0 Z-score (including mild stunting) and BMI/A > 1.0 Z-score). Lipid, glycemic profile, resistin, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, leptin, and adiponectin concentrations were analyzed. Glycemia was significantly higher in the DBM group compared to the weight excess group (5.05 (4.76–5.31) mmol/L vs. 4.57 (4.35–4.81) mmol/L), although no differences were found in insulin and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). Adipokine concentrations did not differ between the groups. However, the DBM group showed higher resistin concentrations normalized by body fat mass than those of the weight excess group (1.44 (0.98–1.93) ng/mL vs. 0.76 (0.55–1.45) ng/mL). Insulin and HOMA-IR showed a negative correlation with adiponectin ( r = −0.590 and −0.624, respectively, both p < 0.01). DBM was associated with increased glucose and resistin concentrations adjusted by fat mass compared to that associated with excess weight alone. Therefore, this association between mild stunting and weight excess has deleterious potential for long-term metabolic function, highlighting an additional precaution against weight gain in children, especially in those with stunting.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".