Sex Differences in the Effects of Repeated Taste Exposure to the Mediterranean Diet: A 6-month Follow-up Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether an intervention based mainly on exposure to the Mediterranean diet (MedDiet), along with recommendations and tools for encouraging healthy eating, lead to different effects on dietary adherence and body weight management six months post-intervention in Canadian men and women. METHODS: Thirty-eight males and 32 premenopausal females (all aged 24-53 years) were exposed to the same 4-week experimental MedDiet during which all foods were provided to participants. Participants also received some recommendations and tools to adhere to a healthy way of eating, with no other contact until the 6-month follow-up visit. RESULTS: Compared with baseline, the Mediterranean score (MedScore) increased at the end of the 6-month follow-up (time effect P = 0.003), with no sex difference (sex-by-time interaction P = 0.97). With regard to MedScore components, sex differences were observed with males reporting changes in more dietary food groups than females. Although the intervention was not focused on body weight management, compared with baseline, BMI decreased during the intervention in both males and females; however, only females maintained the lower BMI 6 months after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to the MedDiet for a short duration promotes the adherence to this food pattern in both sexes and helps in the management of body weight, especially in females.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".