MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058763637 · doi:10.1007/s11130-014-0416-y

Marketplace Analysis Demonstrates Quality Control Standards Needed for Black Raspberry Dietary Supplements

2014· article· en· W2058763637 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jungmin Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Foods for Human Nutrition · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaAgricultural Research ServiceNational Institute of Food and AgricultureU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBlowing a raspberryAnthocyaninFood scienceDietary supplementFood productsComposition (language)ChemistryBiologyToxicology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is currently no standard for the minimum anthocyanin concentration a black raspberry dietary supplement must contain for legal sale in the US. All consumer available black raspberry products (n = 19), packaged as dietary supplements or otherwise prepared (freeze-dried whole and pre-ground powders), were purchased and analyzed for their anthocyanin composition and concentration. Seven of the 19 samples contained no anthocyanins from black raspberry fruit, while three of those seven (without black raspberry fruit) had no anthocyanins of any kind. There was a wide range of anthocyanin concentration within the remaining products (18.1-2,904.8 mg/100 g; n = 12). When expressed as per capsule or per ∼1 teaspoon, concentration ranged from 0.1 to 145.2 mg (average 28 mg; n = 12). Until US dietary supplement labeling comes under regulatory oversight similar to food guidelines, foods are a more dependable source for dietary phenolics than supplements.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Foods for Human NutritionSame topicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207