MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410405997 · doi:10.1111/eci.70059

Bridging the gap in obesity research: A consensus statement from the European Society for Clinical Investigation

2025· review· en· W4410405997 on OpenAlexaff
Federico Carbone, Jean‐Pierre Després, John P. A. Ioannidis, Ian J. Neeland, Gabriella Garruti, Luca Liberale, Stefano Ministrini, Gemma Vilahur, Thomas H. Schindler, Maria Paula Macedo, Agostino Di Ciaula, Marcin Krawczyk, Andreas Geier, György Baffy, Maria Felicia Faienza, Ilaria Farella, Nicola Santoro, Gema Frühbeck, Patricia Yárnoz‐Esquíroz, Javier Gómez‐Ambrosi, Emma Chávez‐Manzanera, Verónica Vázquez‐Velázquez, Jean‐Michel Oppert, Dimitrios N. Kiortsis, Paolo Sbraccia, Carmine Zoccali, Piero Portincasa, Fabrizio Montecucco

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Clinical Investigation · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-NationaleUniversité LavalCentres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services SociauxInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeMinistero dell'Università e della RicercaInstituto de Salud Carlos IIICentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-Fisiopatología de la Obesidad y NutriciónNarodowym Centrum NaukiNarodowe Centrum NaukiNovo NordiskIpsenAmryt PharmaPfizerMinistero della SaluteEli Lilly and CompanyAstraZenecaCSL BehringAlexion PharmaceuticalsGilead SciencesEisaiSanofiEuropean Commission
KeywordsBridging (networking)Statement (logic)Consensus conferenceObesityMedicinePolitical scienceComputer scienceInternal medicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Most forms of obesity are associated with chronic diseases that remain a global public health challenge. AIMS: Despite significant advancements in understanding its pathophysiology, effective management of obesity is hindered by the persistence of knowledge gaps in epidemiology, phenotypic heterogeneity and policy implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This consensus statement by the European Society for Clinical Investigation identifies eight critical areas requiring urgent attention. Key gaps include insufficient long-term data on obesity trends, the inadequacy of body mass index (BMI) as a sole diagnostic measure, and insufficient recognition of phenotypic diversity in obesity-related cardiometabolic risks. Moreover, the socio-economic drivers of obesity and its transition across phenotypes remain poorly understood. RESULTS: The syndemic nature of obesity, exacerbated by globalization and environmental changes, necessitates a holistic approach integrating global frameworks and community-level interventions. This statement advocates for leveraging emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, to refine predictive models and address phenotypic variability. It underscores the importance of collaborative efforts among scientists, policymakers, and stakeholders to create tailored interventions and enduring policies. DISCUSSION: The consensus highlights the need for harmonizing anthropometric and biochemical markers, fostering inclusive public health narratives and combating stigma associated with obesity. By addressing these gaps, this initiative aims to advance research, improve prevention strategies and optimize care delivery for people living with obesity. CONCLUSION: This collaborative effort marks a decisive step towards mitigating the obesity epidemic and its profound impact on global health systems. Ultimately, obesity should be considered as being largely the consequence of a socio-economic model not compatible with optimal human 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)0.388
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.406
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3880.406
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.010
Bibliometrics0.0150.014
Science and technology studies0.0070.016
Scholarly communication0.0280.021
Open science0.0180.024
Research integrity0.0520.059
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.007

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 head0.517
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.011 · 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.

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

Citations34
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207