ArticleDiabetology & metabolic syndrome2024
Prevalence and factors associated with unhealthy metabolic status according to body mass index: analysis of a national nutritional survey.
Article in Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough obesity substantially influences public health owing to related comorbidities, it has been discovered that the incidence of such issues is not directly related to obesity but to the patient's unhealthy metabolic status (MUS) independent of the body mass index (BMI).
objectivesTo describe the prevalence of UMS overall and according to BMI and determine the factors associated with it.
methodsA cross-sectional analytical study was used based on the analysis of secondary databases called the Life Stage Nutritional Surveillance Survey (VIANEV). Participants were selected in two stages, finally obtaining 885 participants. UMS was defined based on the criteria of the Adult Treatment Panel III used to define metabolic status in a set of 5 parameters, if the subject presented two or more alterations it was considered UMS. Six groups were formed according to BMI: metabolically healthy, average weight (MHNW) and unhealthy (MUNW), metabolically healthy, overweight (MHOW) and unhealthy (MUOW), metabolically healthy, obese (MHO) and unhealthy (MUO).).
resultsThe total prevalence of UMS was 73.11%, with MUNW, MUOW, and MUO being 47.90%, 80.34%, and 96.44%, respectively. Only 5.31% did not present any metabolic alteration. The multivariable analysis found variations globally according to sex, age, marital status, geographical region, smoking habit, and altitude.
conclusionsA high prevalence of UMS was observed in Peru, indicating that BMI alone is not a sufficient indicator of metabolic status. These findings suggest that strategies should be prioritized to address the growing problem of UMS, considering the particularities of each subpopulation and using a multifaceted approach that addresses modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.