Comprehensive Profiling of Plasma Fatty Acid Concentrations in Young Healthy Canadian Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Circulating fatty acids (FA) are associated with a multitude of chronic diseases. However, a major gap in establishing such relationships is the lack of accepted fatty acid reference ranges representing healthy individuals. Data on validated FA reference ranges would provide a better understanding of study baseline measures and aid in the evaluation and interpretation of pharmaceutical or dietary interventions. Reference ranges for plasma FA levels have been reported in a few small studies and on a limited number of FA. Therefore, we determined the average and percentiles of a broad set of 61 FA (C14 - C24:1) from plasma total lipids from an ethnically diverse population of healthy young Canadian males and females (Total n = 826). Plasma concentrations of some of the major FA ranged from 0.3 to 4.1 mmol/L for palmitic acid, 0.1 to 1.0 mmol/L for stearic acid, 0.03 to 3.2 mmol/L for oleic acid, 0.2 to 5.0 mmol/L for linoleic acid (LA), 12.0 to 186.9 μmol/L for α-linolenic acid, and 7.2 to 237.5 μmol/L for docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). Males had significantly higher plasma concentrations of γ-linolenic acid (GLA) and n-3 docosapentaenoic acid and lower concentrations of palmitoleic acid, LA and DHA than females. Comparison of FA concentrations between Caucasians, East Asians and South Asians revealed that South Asians had significantly lower levels of palmitoleic acid (p < 0.01) and oleic acid (p = 0.01) while East Asians had lower levels of GLA (p = 0.02) and dihomo-γ-linolenic acid (p = 0.03). Overall, these data provide a comprehensive set of quantitative values that profiles a small cohort of Canadians which highlights the utility of establishing validated FA reference ranges that may be used to understand how deficient, suboptimal, or excess amounts of a given FA may be associated with chronic disease.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".