A meta-analysis of the effects of conjugated linoleic acid on fat-free mass in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment of laboratory animals with a 50:50 mixture of c9,t11 and t10,c12 conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) results in fat loss and, to a smaller degree, fat-free mass (FFM) gain. In a previous meta-analysis, we found that CLA produced a fat loss, but that humans were not as responsive as mice. We performed a similar meta-analysis in the same 18 studies to test whether CLA increased FFM. Only placebo-controlled trials that measured body composition were included. We found that FFM increased during CLA treatment (0.3 +/- 0.7 kg; p = 0.05), but that the change did not display an effect of length of treatment (0.001 +/- 0.005 kg.week(-1); p = 0.8), or an effect of dosage (0.1 +/- 0.1 kg.g CLA(-1).day(-1); p = 0.3). We conclude that FFM does increase in humans during CLA treatment, but the onset of the increase is rapid and the total increase is small (<1%).
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".