MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Health Effects of Mixed Fruit and Vegetable Concentrates: A Systematic Review of the Clinical Interventions

2011· review· en· W2165971984 on OpenAlex
Amin Esfahani, Julia MW Wong, Jennifer Truan, Christopher Villa, Arash Mirrahimi, Korbua Srichaikul, Cyril W.C. Kendall

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Nutrition · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicinePopulationDiseaseEnvironmental healthPsychological interventionMEDLINEAdverse effectFood scienceInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diets rich in fruits and vegetables (FV) have been associated with a reduced risk of chronic disease, including cardiovascular disease. Unfortunately, public health campaigns to increase FV intake have had limited success. A number of mixed concentrated FV products have been studied, which may help certain individuals improve nutrient status. However, the possible health benefits of FV supplements have not been systematically reviewed. We, therefore, undertook a systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify clinical interventions that examined the effect of commercially available concentrated mixed FV supplements on cardiovascular disease risk factors. Twenty-two reports, which used commercially available products, were identified. None of the studies reported any serious adverse effects. Overall, daily consumption of FV supplements significantly increased serum concentrations of the major antioxidant provitamins and vitamins found in plant foods (β-carotene, vitamins C and E) and folate. Functional changes, such as reduced serum homocysteine and markers of protein, lipid, and DNA oxidation, were also reported; in addition, the health advantages on markers of inflammation, immunity, and endothelial function are promising. Limitations of the available studies were related to the diversity of studies conducted with respect to design and study population and the variability in the measured outcomes and assays utilized. While mixed FV supplements may serve as an efficacious complement for individuals who have difficulty achieving their daily FV intake requirement, further research on additional retail preparations is warranted. Key teaching points: Mixed fruit and vegetable supplements produced from plant foods may serve as an efficacious complement to the habitual diet in individuals who have suboptimal intake or variety of nutrient-dense fruits and vegetables. Current research indicates that fruit and vegetable concentrates significantly increase serum levels of antioxidant provitamins and vitamins (β-carotene, vitamins C and E) and folate and reduce homocysteine and markers of oxidative stress. Mechanistic studies and larger, randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind trials in both healthy and high-risk populations are necessary to better understand the health effects of these supplements.

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)0.002
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.330 · 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