ArticleDiabetology & metabolic syndrome2025
Unraveling the connection between obesity, metabolic syndrome and osteoarthritis risk: a large-observational study.
Article in Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe relationship between metabolic syndrome (MetS) and osteoarthritis (OA) remains debated, necessitating further exploration to clarify potential causal links.
methodsThis study included 271,019 participants from the UK Biobank and NHANES, and conducted Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses to determine the relationship between BMI, MetS, and OA. We used generalized linear modeling and restricted cubic spline plots to identify non-linear associations, as well as a mediation analysis of the possible mediating effect of MetS between BMI and OA. MR analyses were used to assess genetic causality, with sensitivity and subgroup analyses ensuring robustness.
resultsMetS was present in 27.3% of UK Biobank and 32.4% of NHANES participants, with OA prevalence at 17.2% and 12.6%. BMI showed a significant positive association with both MetS and OA, with risk increasing notably at a BMI of 27. MetS mediated a small proportion of the BMI effect on OA but was not an independent risk factor after BMI adjustment [1.03 (P < 0.05) in UK Biobank and 1.18 (P > 0.05) in NHANES]. Waist circumference was the primary MetS component influencing OA risk. Subgroup analyses indicated MetS increased OA risk in younger participants and showed a "U" shaped association across BMI levels. MR results consistent with observational studies.
conclusionsThere's a complex interplay between BMI, MetS, and OA. Although MetS mediated a small proportion of the BMI effect, it was not an independent risk factor for OA in the overall population. The impact of MetS on the risk of OA varied by age and BMI levels.
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.