Influence du jeûne du Ramadan sur les sensations d'appétit chez des musulmans diabétiques de type 2 au Mali
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to examine the influence of Ramadan fast on appetite sensations, nutritional intakes and body weight in Malians with type 2 diabetes. Appetite sensations were assessed before Ramadan and then at the second, ninth, and sixteenth days of Ramadan (period). A total of 24 subjects recorded their appetite sensations every 2 h between 0800 and 2200 h using visual analogue scales. Daily energy intakes were estimated by a 48-h food recall (before and during Ramadan). Results showed a significant sex effect for desire to eat (p < 0.04) and a significant period effect for desire to eat and fullness (p < 0.01). Significant sex by period interactions were observed for fullness (p < 0.001), desire to eat (p < 0.01), and prospective food consumption (p < 0.03). Moreover, significant sex by period by time interactions were found for all appetite sensations (p < 0.007). Interaction effects were mainly explained by sex differences in appetite sensations before rather than during Ramadan. Although a significant body weight loss was observed in men and a significant decrease in waist circumference was found in women (p < 0.05), no significant changes in reported average daily energy intakes were observed in either men or women. According to these preliminary results, Ramadan fasting has an impact on appetite sensations that is probably not the same in men and women.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".