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 OpenAlexafffund
Amin Esfahani, Julia MW Wong, Jennifer Truan, Christopher Villa, Arash Mirrahimi, Korbua Srichaikul, Cyril W.C. Kendall

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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

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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations97
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of NutritionSame topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207