Effect of fruit and vegetable intake on oxidative stress and inflammation in COPD: a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epidemiological evidence supports a positive relationship between fruit and vegetable (FV) intake, lung function and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Increasing FV intake may attenuate the oxidative stress and inflammation associated with COPD. An exploratory randomised controlled trial to examine the effect of increased consumption of FV on oxidative stress and inflammation in moderate-to-severe COPD was conducted. 81 symptomatically stable patients with a habitually low FV intake (two or fewer portions of FV per day) were randomised to the intervention group (five or more portions of FV per day) or the control group (two or fewer portions of FV per day). Each participant received self-selected weekly home deliveries of FV for 12 weeks. 75 participants completed the intervention. There was a significant between-group change in self-reported FV intake and biomarkers of FV intake (zeaxanthin (p = 0.034) and β-cryptoxanthin (p = 0.015)), indicating good compliance; post-intervention intakes in intervention and control groups were 6.1 and 1.9 portions of FV per day, respectively. There were no significant changes in biomarkers of airway inflammation (interleukin-8 and myeloperoxidase) and systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein) or airway and systemic oxidative stress (8-isoprostane). This exploratory study demonstrated that patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were able to comply with an intervention to increase FV intake; however, this had no significant effect on airway or systemic oxidative stress and inflammation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".