MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391650269 · doi:10.1111/obr.13702

Gut peptides before and following Roux‐En‐Y gastric bypass: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2024· review· en· W4391650269 on OpenAlexaff
Mylène Simoneau, Brad McKay, Emma Brooks, Éric Doucet, Aurélie Baillot

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Reviews · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGhrelinPostprandialMedicineAppetiteMeta-analysisInternal medicineRoux-en-Y anastomosisGastric bypassGastroenterologyPeptide YYEndocrinologyObesityWeight lossHormoneInsulinNeuropeptide Y receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A systematic search was conducted in Medline Ovid, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up until March 2021 following PRISMA guidelines. Studies included evaluated ghrelin, GLP-1, PYY or appetite sensation via visual analogue scales (VASs) before and after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in adults. A multilevel model with random effects for study and follow-up time points nested in study was fit to the data. The model included kcal consumption as a covariate and time points as moderators. Among the 2559 articles identified, k = 47 were included, among which k = 19 evaluated ghrelin, k = 40 GLP-1, k = 22 PYY, and k = 8 appetite sensation. Our results indicate that fasting ghrelin levels are decreased 2 weeks post-RYGB (p = 0.005) but do not differ from baseline from 6 weeks to 1-year post-RYGB. Postprandial ghrelin and fasting GLP-1 levels were not different from pre-surgical values. Postprandial levels of GLP-1 increased significantly from 1 week (p < 0.001) to 2 years post-RYGB (p < 0.01) compared with pre-RYGB. Fasting PYY increased at 6 months (p = 0.034) and 1 year (p = 0.029) post-surgery; also, postprandial levels increased up to 1 year (p < 0.01). Insufficient data on appetite sensation were available to be meta-analyzed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0270.010
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity ReviewsSame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207