Assessment of people living with obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RECOMMENDATIONS • We suggest that HCPs involved in screening, assessing and managing PLWO use the '5As' framework to initiate the discussion by asking for their permission and assessing their readiness to initiate treatment (Level 4, Grade D, Consensus). • HCPs can measure height and weight and calculate BMI in all adults (Level 2a, Grade B), and measure waist circumference in individuals with a BMI 25 - 35 kg/m2 (Level 2b, Grade B). • We suggest that a comprehensive history to identify root causes of weight gain as well as complications of obesity and potential barriers to treatment be included in the assessment (Level 4, Grade D). • We recommend measurement of blood pressure in both arms, fasting glucose or glycated haemoglobin and lipid profile to determine cardiometabolic risk and, where appropriate, alanine transaminase to screen for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease in PLWO (Level 3, Grade D). • We suggest that HCPs consider using the Edmonton Obesity Staging System to determine the severity of obesity and guide clinical decision-making (Level 4, Grade D).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.008 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".