Mexican Clinical Practice Guidelines for Adult Overweight and Obesity Management
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop Mexico's first methodologically rigorous clinical practice guideline for the management of adult overweight and obesity. The target audiences are interdisciplinary healthcare professionals across healthcare systems who are the first point of contact for patients with obesity in Mexico, patients, and health system decision makers. RECENT FINDINGS: A review of recent international obesity clinical practice guidelines and an expert consensus process identified: i) common recommendations appropriate for implementation in Mexico and ii) knowledge gaps requiring the formulation of new recommendations. In all, 20 new recommendations and 20 good practice statements were developed using the GRADE Evidence-to-Decision Framework and expert consensus. Overweight and obesity negatively impact the health and well-being of individuals and populations in Mexico. This guideline aims to establish a new evidence-based, patient-centered, non-stigmatizing, and practical treatment and management framework, based on the fundamental principles of chronic disease prevention and management.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it