Limited Effects of Micronutrient Supplementation on Strength and Physical Function After Abdominal Aortic Aneurysmectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tissue injury following ischemia‐reperfusion is mediated in part by free oxygen radicals. We hypothesized that perioperative micronutrient supplementation would augment antioxidant defenses, minimize muscle injury, and minimize postoperative decreases in muscle strength and physical function following abdominal aortic aneurysmectomy. SETTING: A university‐affiliated hospital and regional referral center. DESIGN: A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial of supplementation with beta‐carotene, vitamins C and E, zinc, and selenium for a period of 2–3 weeks prior to surgery and 1 week thereafter. STUDY POPULATION: Patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysmectomy (n=18 per group). PRINCIPAL MEASUREMENTS: Handgrip and other measures of strength and physical function. RESULTS: Handgrip and quadriceps strength decreased following surgery, but not to a significantly different extent in the placebo and supplemented groups. Self‐rated physical function decreased following surgery in the placebo group and was preserved in the supplemented group. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative supplementation with micronutrients with antioxidant properties has limited effects on strength and physical function following major elective surgery.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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".