MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404473685 · doi:10.1017/s0029665124007559

Exploring the association between sarcopenic obesity and cardiovascular risk: a summary of findings from longitudinal studies and potential mechanisms

2024· review· en· W4404473685 on OpenAlexaff
Zhongyang Guan, Blossom C. M. Stephan, Lorenzo M. Donini, Carla M. Prado, Marc Sim, Mario Siervo

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of The Nutrition Society · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSarcopenic obesitySarcopeniaMedicineEpidemiologyObesityMechanism (biology)Observational studyAssociation (psychology)Insulin resistanceComorbidityBioinformaticsGerontologyInternal medicinePsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is estimated that more than one-tenth of adults aged ≥60 years are now classified as having sarcopenic obesity (SO), a clinical condition characterised by the concurrent presence of sarcopenia (low muscle mass and weakness) and obesity (excessive fat mass). Independently, sarcopenia and obesity are associated with a high risk of numerous adverse health outcomes including CVD and neurological conditions (e.g. dementia), but SO may confer a greater risk, exceeding either condition alone. This imposes a substantial burden on individuals, healthcare systems and society. In recent years, an increasing number of observational studies have explored the association between SO and the risk of CVD; however, results are mixed. Moreover, the pathophysiology of SO is governed by a complex interplay of multiple mechanisms including insulin resistance, inflammation, oxidative stress, hormonal shifts and alteration of energy balance, which may also play a role in the occurrence of various CVD. Yet, the exact mechanisms underlying the pathological connection between these two complex conditions remain largely unexplored. The aim of this review is to examine the association between SO and CVD. Specifically, we seek to: (1) discuss the definition, epidemiology and diagnosis of SO; (2) reconcile previously inconsistent findings by synthesising evidence from longitudinal studies on the epidemiological link between SO and CVD and (3) discuss critical mechanisms that may elucidate the complex and potentially bidirectional relationships between SO and CVD.

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)0.002
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of The Nutrition SocietySame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207