MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982494946

Influence of sleeping habits on adaptive thermogenesis during weight loss in adults

2021· other· en· W6982494946 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCensus and Population Estimation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDairy Farmers of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité Laval
KeywordsWeight lossOverweightCaloric theoryObesityThermogenesisResting energy expenditureBody weightFat mass
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To verify whether sleeping habits affect adaptive thermogenesis (i.e. greater than predicted decrease in resting energy expenditure, REE) in overweight and obese adults subjected to caloric restriction. Methods: A total of 123 overweight and obese men and women (mean ± SD age, 41.1 ± 6.0 years; mean ± SD body mass index, 33.2 ± 3.6 kg/m2) were tested before and 17.2 ± 3.7 weeks after dietary treatment (-300 kcal/day on average). Body fat mass (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), REE (indirect calorimetry) and sleep duration and quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, PSQI) were assessed at both baseline and at the end of the weight loss program. Two sets of formula were used to predict changes in REE and the difference between the changes in the predicted REE from the reference equations and the changes in the measured REE were compared between sleep duration groups. Results: The mean weight loss of all participants over the dietary intervention was 5.9 ± 4.6 kg, 73% of which came from fat losses. The small dietary restriction led to a 57 kcal/day reduction in REE at the end of the weight-loss program (P5) and good (PSQI score = 5) sleepers. Conclusion: This study provides evidence that sleeping habits are not associated with a greater than predicted decrease in REE during weight loss in adults exposed to small caloric restriction.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro)Same topicCensus and Population EstimationFrench-language works237,207