Blood glucose lowering effects of brown rice in normal and diabetic subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbohydrate foods, which produce low glycemic responses, have been shown to be beneficial in the dietary management of chronic diseases such as diabetes and hyperlipidemia. This study determined the starch digestion rate in vitro and, in a randomised crossover design, the postprandial blood glucose response of 10 healthy and nine type 2 diabetic volunteers to brown rice compared to milled rice from the same batch and variety. The total sugar released in vitro was 23.7% lower in brown rice than in milled rice. In healthy volunteers, the glycemic area and glycemic index were, respectively, 19.8% and 12.1% lower (p < 0.05) in brown rice than milled rice, while in diabetics, the respective values were 35.2% and 35.6% lower. The effect was partly due to the higher amounts of phytic acid, polyphenols, dietary fiber and oil in brown compared to milled rice and the difference in some physicochemical properties of the rice samples such as minimum cooking time and degree of gelatinisation. In conclusion, brown rice is a more health beneficial food for diabetics and hyperglycemic individuals than milled rice.
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".