Meal replacements and fibre supplement as a strategy for weight loss. Proprietary PGX® meal replacement and PGX® fibre supplement in addition to a calorie-restricted diet to achieve weight loss in a clinical setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Meal replacements and viscous soluble fibre represent safe and sustainable aids for weight loss. Our purpose was to determine if PGX® meal replacements and PGX(®) fibre complex in combination with a calorie-restricted diet would aid in weight loss in a clinical setting. Fifty-two overweight and obese participants (49 women, 3 men; average age 47.1 years) with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 33.8 ± 6.4 kg/m(2) consumed 57 g of proprietary PGX® meal replacement product at breakfast and another 57 g at lunch for 12 weeks. In addition to the meal replacements, they were also asked to consume 5 g/day of PGX® fibre in the form of granules, powder or capsules together with 250 mlwater. A registered dietician recommended low-fat, low-glycaemic-index foods for snacks and the dinner menus such that each volunteer was consuming a total of 1200 kcal/day. All participants (n = 52) lost a significant amount of weight from baseline (-4.69 ± 3.73 kg), which was further reflected in the reductions in their waist (-7.11 ± 6.35 cm) and hip circumference (-5.59 ± 3.58 cm) over the 12-week study (p < 0.0001). BMI scores (n = 51) were reduced by 1.6 ± 1.4 kg/m(2). The use of PGX® meal replacements and PGX(®) fibre along with a controlled dietary caloric intake is of benefit for short-term weight loss.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".