Conjugated linoleic acid improves airway hyper‐reactivity in overweight mild asthmatics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Conjugated linoleic acids (CLA) are naturally occurring fatty acids that have multiple biological properties including the regulation of metabolic, proliferative and immune processes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of CLA as a dietary supplement in mild asthma. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Twenty-eight adult subjects (aged 19-40 years) with mild asthma (FEV(1)>70% predicted) were randomized to CLA 4.5 g/day or placebo for 12 weeks in addition to usual treatment. On average, subjects were overweight with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 27.9 kg/m(2). RESULTS: Subjects in the CLA group had a significant improvement in airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) at week 12 compared with week 0 [PC(20) 6.6 (2.1) mg/mL vs. 2.2 (0.7) mg/mL; P<0.05]. The CLA group had a significant reduction in weight and BMI compared with placebo and this was associated with a reduction in leptin/adiponectin ratio. There were no differences in systemic cytokine levels, induced sputum cell counts, quality-of-life scores or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: CLA treatment as an adjunct to usual care in overweight mild asthmatics was well tolerated and was associated with improvements in AHR and BMI.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".