Key result
Relative Fat Mass-defined obesity links to significantly higher estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk in both sexes.
Why the study?
Is obesity defined by Relative Fat Mass associated with higher 10-year cardiovascular risk in Peruvian adults?
Cross-Sectional (n=651)
Is obesity defined by Relative Fat Mass associated with higher 10-year cardiovascular risk in Peruvian adults?
Effect estimate: β: 0.48 (women), β: 0.39 (men) (95% CI 0.32-0.63 (women), 0.23-0.56 (men))
Obesity defined by Relative Fat Mass is positively associated with estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk in Peruvian adults, suggesting its utility as a risk assessment tool.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chaquila et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiovascular risk (n=651). Obesity defined by Relative Fat Mass (RFM) vs. Non-obese was evaluated on 10-year cardiovascular risk estimated by the Framingham risk score (β: 0.48 (women), β: 0.39 (men), 95% CI 0.32-0.63 (women), 0.23-0.56 (men)). Obesity defined by Relative Fat Mass was associated with higher estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk in both women (β: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.32-0.63) and men (β: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.23-0.56).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: