MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4397038868 · doi:10.1111/obr.13767

Evaluation of visceral adipose tissue thresholds for elevated metabolic syndrome risk across diverse populations: A systematic review

2024· review· en· W4397038868 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan P. Bennett, Carla M. Prado, Steven B. Heymsfield, John Shepherd

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Reviews · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineMetabolic syndromeObesityEthnic groupDemographyAdipose tissueRisk assessmentPopulationBody mass indexInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Beyond obesity, excess levels of visceral adipose tissue (VAT) significantly contribute to the risk of developing metabolic syndrome (MetS), although thresholds for increased risk vary based on population, regions of interest, and units of measure employed. We sought to determine whether a common threshold exists that is indicative of heightened MetS risk across all populations, accounting for sex, age, BMI, and race/ethnicity. A systematic literature review was conducted in September 2023, presenting threshold values for elevated MetS risk. Standardization equations harmonized the results from DXA, CT, and MRI systems to facilitate a comparison of threshold variations across studies. A total of 52 papers were identified. No single threshold could accurately indicate elevated risk for both males and females across varying BMI, race/ethnicity, and age groups. Thresholds fluctuated from 70 to 165.9 cm 2 , with reported values consistently lower in females. Generally, premenopausal females and younger adults manifested elevated risks at lower VAT compared to their older counterparts. Notably, Asian populations exhibited elevated risks at lower VAT areas (70–136 cm 2 ) compared to Caucasian populations (85.6–165.9 cm 2 ). All considered studies reported associations of VAT without accommodating covariates. No single VAT area threshold for elevated MetS risk was discernible post‐harmonization by technology, units of measure, and region of interest. This review summarizes available evidence for MetS risk assessment in clinical practice. Further exploration of demographic‐specific interactions between VAT area and other risk factors is imperative to comprehensively delineate overarching MetS risk.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations27
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity ReviewsSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207