MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041642360 · doi:10.1097/mco.0b013e32834d2259

Rethinking dietary cholesterol

2011· review· en· W2041642360 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
María Luz Fernández

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic Care · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDietary CholesterolCholesterolMedicineEpidemiologyCoronary heart diseaseLdl cholesterolEnvironmental healthLimitingPopulationHigh cholesterolBlood cholesterolEndocrinologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The perceived notion that dietary cholesterol is associated with increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) has led to dietary recommendations of no more than 300 mg/day for healthy populations in the USA. This study will review the recent evidence that challenges the current dietary restrictions regarding cholesterol while it presents some beneficial effects of eggs (an icon for dietary cholesterol) in healthy individuals. RECENT FINDINGS: The European countries, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Korea and India among others do not have an upper limit for cholesterol intake in their dietary guidelines. Further, existing epidemiological data have clearly demonstrated that dietary cholesterol is not correlated with increased risk for CHD. Although numerous clinical studies have shown that dietary cholesterol challenges may increase plasma LDL cholesterol in certain individuals, who are more sensitive to dietary cholesterol (about one-quarter of the population), HDL cholesterol also rises resulting in the maintenance of the LDL/HDL cholesterol ratio, a key marker of CHD risk. SUMMARY: The lines of evidence coming from current epidemiological studies and from clinical interventions utilizing different types of cholesterol challenges support the notion that the recommendations limiting dietary cholesterol should be reconsidered.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.377
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.127 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic CareSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207