MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020819349 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0107391

The Effect of Ginseng (The Genus Panax) on Glycemic Control: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

2014· review· en· W2020819349 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGinseng Biological Effects and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and DiabetesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesCanadian Society of Endocrinology and MetabolismInternational Nut and Dried Fruit CouncilAlmond Board of CaliforniaEuropean Foundation for the Study of DiabetesCoca-Cola FoundationLoblaw Companies LimitedCanola Council of CanadaSaskatchewan Pulse GrowersKellogg'sUniversity of AlabamaCanadian Foundation for Dietetic ResearchRural Development AdministrationCanadian Diabetes AssociationUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamArizona State UniversityCalifornia Strawberry CommissionAlpro FoundationCanadian Nutrition SocietyPeanut InstituteInnovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUniversity of South CarolinaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPepsiCoHospital for Sick ChildrenAmerican Heart AssociationU.S. Department of AgricultureAbbott LaboratoriesWorld Health Organization
KeywordsMedicineGlycemicGlycated hemoglobinRandomized controlled trialDiabetes mellitusInsulin resistanceCochrane LibraryInternal medicineMeta-analysisGinsengInsulinType 2 diabetesEndocrinologyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Despite the widespread use of ginseng in the management of diabetes, supporting evidence of its anti-hyperglycemic efficacy is limited, necessitating the need for evidence-based recommendations for the potential inclusion of ginseng in diabetes management. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the effect of ginseng on glycemic control in a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in people with and without diabetes. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library (through July 3, 2013). STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials ≥30 days assessing the glycemic effects of ginseng in people with and without diabetes. DATA EXTRACTION: Relevant data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. The Heyland Methodological Quality Score and the Cochrane risk of bias tool were used to assess study quality and risk of bias respectively. DATA SYNTHESIS: Sixteen trials were included, in which 16 fasting blood glucose (n = 770), 10 fasting plasma insulin (n = 349), 9 glycated hemoglobin (n = 264), and 7 homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (n = 305) comparisons were reported. Ginseng significantly reduced fasting blood glucose compared to control (MD = -0.31 mmol/L [95% CI: -0.59 to -0.03], P = 0.03). Although there was no significant effect on fasting plasma insulin, glycated hemoglobin, or homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, a priori subgroup analyses did show significant reductions in glycated hemoglobin in parallel compared to crossover trials (MD = 0.22% [95%CI: 0.06 to 0.37], P = 0.01). LIMITATIONS: Most trials were of short duration (67% trials<12wks), and included participants with a relatively good glycemic control (median HbA1c non-diabetes = 5.4% [2 trials]; median HbA1c diabetes = 7.1% [7 trials]). CONCLUSIONS: Ginseng modestly yet significantly improved fasting blood glucose in people with and without diabetes. In order to address the uncertainty in our effect estimates and provide better assessments of ginseng's anti-diabetic efficacy, larger and longer randomized controlled trials using standardized ginseng preparations are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01841229.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0370.012
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it