MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403664738 · doi:10.1186/s40795-024-00948-5

Exploring metabolic syndrome and dietary quality in Iranian adults: a cross-sectional study

2024· article· en· W4403664738 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Namkhah, Kiyavash Irankhah, Sina Sarviha, Seyyed Reza Sobhani

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Nutrition · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersMashhad University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsMedicineClinical nutritionCross-sectional studyPublic healthMetabolic syndromeEnvironmental healthGerontologyInternal medicineObesityNursingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a cluster of cardiovascular risk factors affecting a quarter of the global population, with diet playing a significant role in its progression. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the Dietary Diabetes Risk Reduction Score (DDRRS) and the Macronutrient Quality Index (MQI) scoring systems in assessing the diet-related risk of metabolic syndrome. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, data from 7431 individuals aged between 30 and 70 years, obtained from the Mashhad Cohort Study, were utilized to evaluate the risk factors of metabolic syndrome. A valid semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire was used to assess participants' dietary intake. The MQI was calculated based on carbohydrate, fat, and healthy protein components, while the DDRRS was also computed. Anthropometric measurements and blood samples were taken to determine the presence of metabolic syndrome. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the association between MQI and DDRRS with metabolic syndrome and its components. RESULTS: According to the crude model, we observed lower odds of MetS in the highest quartile of DDRRS and MQI compared to the lowest quartile (P-trend < 0.001). This trend persisted in the fully adjusted models, revealing odds ratios of 0.399 (95% CI: 0.319-0.500) and 0.597 (95% CI: 0.476-0.749) for DDRRS and MQI, respectively. After controlling for all potential confounders, we observed lower odds of central obesity in the highest quartile of MQI (OR: 0.818, 95% CI: 0.676-0.989, P-trend = 0.027). Furthermore, we found that the odds of high triglyceride levels were lower in the highest quartile of DDRRS compared to the lowest quartile (OR: 0.633, 95% CI: 0.521, 0.770, P-trend < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, our study indicates that greater adherence to both DDRRS and MQI is linked to a decreased risk of metabolic syndrome and its components. These findings hold significant implications for public health and the development of personalized nutrition strategies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NutritionSame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207