MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101157511 · doi:10.1186/1475-2891-13-66

Chocolate flavanols and skin photoprotection: a parallel, double-blind, randomized clinical trial

2014· article· en· W2101157511 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSkin Protection and Aging
Canadian institutionsHôpital Saint-François d'AssiseUniversité LavalHotel Dieu Hospital
FundersInstitut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments FonctionnelsUniversité Laval
KeywordsMedicineSunburnPhotoagingErythemaRandomized controlled trialConfidence intervalRandomizationDermatologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation has deleterious effects on the skin, including sunburn, photoaging and cancer. Chocolate flavanols are naturally-occurring antioxidant and anti-inflammatory molecules that could play a role in preventing cutaneous UV damage. We investigated the influence of 12-week high-flavanol chocolate (HFC) consumption on skin sensitivity to UV radiation, measured by minimal erythema dose (MED). We also evaluated skin elasticity and hydration. METHODS: In this 2-group, parallel, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 74 women aged 20-65 years and Fitzpatrick skin phototypes I or II were recruited from the general community in Quebec City, for randomization to either HFC (n = 33) or low-flavanol chocolate (LFC) (n = 41). A blocked randomisation (4), considering date of entry, skin type and age as factors, generated a sequentially-numbered allocation list. Study participants and research assistants were blinded. Totally, 30 g of chocolate were consumed daily for 12 weeks, followed by a 3-week washout period. MED was assessed at baseline and at 6, 9, 12 and 15 weeks. Main outcome was changes in MED at week 12. RESULTS: 33 participants in the HFC group and 41 in the LFC group were analyzed with 15 weeks of follow-up. Both groups showed similarly-increased MED at 12 weeks (HFC: 0.0252 ± 0.1099 J/cm2 [mean ± standard deviation (SD)]; LFC: 0.0151 ± 0.1118; mean difference (MD): 0.0100 J/cm2; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.0417 to 0.0618). However, after 3-week washout, the HFC group presented decreased MED (-0.0248 ± 0.1145) whereas no effect was seen in the LFC group (0.0168 ± 0.1698) (MD: -0.0417; 95% CI: -0.1106 to 0.0272). Net temple elasticity increased slightly but significantly by 0.09 ± 0.12 mm in the HFC group at 12 weeks compared to 0.02 ± 0.12 mm in the LFC group (MD: 0.06; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.12 ). No significant adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Our study failed to demonstrate a statistically-significant protective effect of HFC vs. LFC consumption on skin sensitivity to UV radiation as measured by MED. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01444625.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.306 · 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