MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406342315 · doi:10.1007/s11886-024-02165-9

Promotion of Cardiometabolic Health: A Personal Journey

2025· review· en· W4406342315 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean‐Pierre Després

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Cardiology Reports · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversité du QuébecUniversité LavalCentres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services SociauxInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec, Université Laval
KeywordsMedicineHealth promotionNursingPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Narrative review of the author's main contributions to the field of cardiovascular health spanning four decades, with a focus on findings related to 1- the pathophysiology of obesity, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, and 2- the management/prevention of these conditions. Particular attention is given to the importance of regular physical activity. RECENT FINDINGS: Because behaviors and their physiological consequences are still not measured in clinical practice, it is proposed to systematically assess and target "lifestyle vital signs" (waist circumference, cardiorespiratory fitness, food-based diet quality and level of leisure-time physical activity) in primary care. However, cardiometabolic health of the population will not be substantially improved until our living and economic conditions are permissive to the adoption of healthy behaviors. Closing the gap between primary care and public health should be a priority to address the socioeconomic determinants of cardiometabolic health.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Cardiology ReportsSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207