Evidence mapPaperPMID 39472276Full record

ReviewPhysiological reports2024

Reverse epidemiology of obesity paradox: Fact or fiction?

Bellamkonda K Kishore

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Physiological reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Bellamkonda K KishoreDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8232-9827

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Obesity paradox refers to the clinical observation that when acute cardiovascular decompensation occurs, patients with obesity may have a survival benefit. This apparently runs counter to the epidemiology of obesity, which may increase the risk for non-communicable diseases (NCDs). The scientific community is split on obesity paradox, with some supporting it, while others call it BMI paradox. This review: (a) defines the obesity paradox, and its proposed role in overall mortality in NCDs; (b) delineates evidence for and against obesity paradox; (c) presents the importance of using different indices of body mass to assess the risk in NCDs; (d) examines the role of metabolically healthy obesity in obesity paradox, and emerging importance of cardio-respiratory fitness (CRF) as an independent predictor of CVD risk and all-cause mortality in patients with/without obesity. Evidence suggests that the development of obesity and insulin resistance are influenced by genetic (or ethnic) make up and dietary habits (culture) of the individuals. Hence, this review presents lean diabetes, which has higher total CVD and non-CVD mortality as compared to diabetics with obesity and the possibility of maternal factors programming cardiometabolic risk during fetal development, which may lead to a paradigm shift in our understanding of obesity.

Indexed as

ObesityBody Mass IndexCardiorespiratory FitnessCardiovascular DiseasesHumansObesity ParadoxRisk FactorsBMI paradoxcardio‐respiratory fitnesscardiovascular decompensationlean diabetesmetabolically healthy obesitynon‐communicable diseasesobesity paradox

Identifiers

PMID39472276
PMCPMC11521792

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.