Study record
Circulating MOTS-c levels are decreased in obese male children and adolescents and associated with insulin resistance
Du C, Zhang C, Wu W et al. · Pediatr Diabetes · 2018
Human obs.Endogenous MOTS-c measuredEvidence tier B
What this study reported
Found lower circulating MOTS-c in obese children and adolescents than in controls; by sex, levels were lower in obese males but comparable between obese and healthy females. In males, MOTS-c correlated negatively with BMI, waist measures, fasting insulin, HOMA-IR and HbA1c.
Limitations
Cross-sectional case-control design in a single region; the female subgroup was small; ELISA-based measurement.
Study record
| Study model | Human observational |
|---|---|
| Substance studied | Endogenous MOTS-c measuredNaturally occurring MOTS-c was measured; nothing was given. |
| Species | human |
| System studied | Obese and healthy children and adolescents in Hubei Province, China; circulating MOTS-c |
| Population | obese children and adolescents and healthy controls |
| Design | Case-control study |
| Sample size as reported | 97 participants (40 obese, 27 males; 57 controls, 40 males) |
| Control group | non-obese children and adolescents |
| Route (data field only) | Not reported |
| Endpoints measured | circulating MOTS-c; BMI and BMI SD score; waist circumference and waist-to-hip ratio; fasting insulin and HOMA-IR; HbA1c |
| Pathways measured | Insulin & glucose handling |
| Research areas | Metabolic |
| Evidence tier | B — Other human study |
| Publication types | Journal Article |
Appraisal
Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.
- Relevance to MOTS-c
- Direct
- Model applicability
- Human
- Sample size
- Small
- Controls
- Appropriate
- Outcome validity
- Validated biomarker
- Support for its own conclusion
- Moderate
Provenance
- Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
- Annotated from the published abstract.
- Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
- Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.