MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148757459 · doi:10.1080/09637480903022735

Effect of flaxseed gum on reduction of blood glucose and cholesterol in type 2 diabetic patients

2009· article· en· W2148757459 on OpenAlexaff
Goutam Thakur, Analava Mitra, Kunal Pal, Dérick Rousseau

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNatural Antidiabetic Agents Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersIndian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
KeywordsMedicineCholesterolType 2 diabetesInternal medicineLdl cholesterolDiabetes mellitusFood scienceEndocrinologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of ingestion of flaxseed gum on blood glucose and cholesterol, particularly low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, in type 2 diabetes were evaluated. Flaxseed gum was incorporated in wheat flour chapattis. Sixty patients of type 2 diabetes were fed a daily diet for 3 months, along with six wheat flour chapattis containing flaxseed gum (5 g), as per the recommendations of the American Diabetic Association. The control group (60 individuals) consumed an identical diet but the chapattis were without gum. The blood biochemistry profiles monitored before starting the study and at monthly intervals showed fasting blood sugar in the experimental group decreased from 154 ± 8 mg/dl to 136 ± 7 mg/dl (P=0.03) while the total cholesterol reduced from 182 ± 11 mg/dl to 163 ± 9 mg/dl (P=0.03). Results showed a decrease in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol from 110 ± 8 mg/dl to 92 ± 9 mg/dl (P=0.02). The study demonstrated the efficacy of flax gum in the blood biochemistry profiles of type 2 diabetes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations175
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food Sciences and NutritionSame topicNatural Antidiabetic Agents StudiesFrench-language works237,207