A modified carbohydrate diet, including uniquely formulated meal and snack products, results in weight loss and improvement in lipid profile compared to a reduced calorie diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modified carbohydrate diets, such as South Beach Diet TM (SBD) may be advantageous for obesity treatment & associated dislipidemias. A multi‐center parallel study examined the effect of SBD, including SBD products, on weight loss & lipids compared to Reduced Calorie Diet (RCD). Overweight & obese women (n= 240) were randomized to follow SBD alone, SBD + SBD Products (SBDP), RCD, or RCD + SBD Products (RCDP) for 24 wks. SBDP & RCDP consumed 1‐2 SBD snacks & 1‐2 SBD meals/day. All groups lost weight from baseline to wks, 2, 8, 12, 16, 20 & 24 (p<0.05). SBDP & SBD had mean reductions in weight from baseline of 5.4%±3.0 & 4%±3.6 at 12 wks & 5.3%±5.2 & 4%±4.8 at 24 weeks respectively. RCDP & RCD had mean reductions in weight of 4%±3.9 & 3.5%±3.7 at 12 wks & 4.3%±5.3 & 4%±4.8 at 24 wks respectively. SBD groups had significant (p<0.05) reductions in TG from baseline to wk 12, with SBDP decreasing further to wk 24. HDL was increased by 8% from baseline to wk 24 in SBDP, which was significant for the interaction of diet & product (p<0.001). SBDP reduced TC:HDL from baseline to 24 wks compared to other groups (p<0.01). SBD groups also had significantly lower (p<0.05) diastolic BP than RCD groups at wk 24, with the SBDP group experiencing the greatest reduction (P<0.05). These results suggest that consuming formulated meal & snack products as part of the SBD pattern can promote weight loss & have a beneficial impact on CVD risk markers (Supported by Kraft Foods).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".