MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404827644 · doi:10.1136/bmjph-2023-000247

Review on the update in obesity management: epidemiology

2024· article· en· W4404827644 on OpenAlexaff
Katya Peri, Mark J. Eisenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpidemiologyObesityMedicineManagement of obesityEnvironmental healthPathologyWeight loss

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity remains one of the largest public health issues in the developed world. Over the past 50 years, the prevalence of this disease has risen to epidemic proportions and remains on the rise. Importantly, the incidence of obesity coincides with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, type II diabetes, hypertension, fatty liver disease, obstructive sleep apnoea and several cancers. This article is the first of a three-part series of reviews surveying the obesity epidemic and interventions to address it. It provides an overview of the disease's prevalence, aetiology and comorbidities as well as the guidelines currently available to treat obesity. Obesity is a multifactorial disease with a complex aetiology. Genetic, environmental and epigenetic factors contribute to the occurrence of obesity. Examples include the thrifty gene hypothesis, epigenetics and the presence of obesogenic environments. Furthermore, an imbalance in energy intake versus expenditure encourages weight gain. Current guidelines aim to instruct primary care practitioners on the appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic tools to use in patients with obesity. Obesity remains an important public health concern with many causes, influences and outcomes for patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.014

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 head0.378
GPT teacher head0.582
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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 venueBMJ Public HealthSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207