Age of obesity onset affects subcutaneous adipose tissue cellularity differently in the abdominal and femoral region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the effect of age of obesity onset, sex, and their interaction on abdominal and femoral subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) morphology (degree of adipocyte hyperplasia or hypertrophy). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we isolated adipocytes via collagenase digestion from abdominal and femoral SAT biopsies taken from male and female adults with childhood-onset obesity (CO; n = 8 males, n = 16 females) or adult-onset obesity (AO; n = 8 males, n = 13 females). Regional body composition was measured with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and a single-slice abdominal computed tomography scan. Mean adipocyte size was measured in abdominal and femoral SAT and was used to quantify morphology in android and gynoid subcutaneous fat, respectively. RESULTS: Abdominal SAT morphology was more hyperplastic in females with CO than females with AO (p = 0.004) but did not differ between males with CO and males with AO (p = 0.996). Conversely, femoral SAT morphology was more hypertrophic in males and females with CO than those with AO. CONCLUSIONS: Age of obesity onset appears to affect SAT morphology differently in the abdominal and femoral regions of male and female adults. Our findings challenge the notion that SAT is uniformly hyperplastic in CO and hypertrophic in AO.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".