Effect of One Unit Blood Donation on Appetite-Related Biomarkers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is commonly reported that blood donation (BD) leads to an increase in appetite. To investigate this claim, a questionnaire was offered to 306 people who had a history of BD at least once in their life. Following a positive outcome from the questionnaire, we further investigated the impact of BD on appetite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The questionnaire study consists of a 5-question survey with VAS was performed on 399 volunteers. Later, 108 volunteers were enrolled in a laboratory study. Blood samples were withdrawn before and after BD. Leptin, ghrelin, neuropeptide-Y (NPY), and alpha-melanocyte stimulating hormone (α-MSH) levels were measured by ELISA kits. VAS assessment was also performed on all participants before and after BD. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in the level of leptin but the levels of ghrelin, NPY and α-MSH were unchanged. A significant change in VAS value in terms of appetite was also observed. CONCLUSION: The elevation of appetite after BD is predominantly psychological. Hormonal changes may contribute to the control of hypothalamic hunger and satiety centers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".