Antioxidant Supplements and Gastrointestinal Diseases: A Critical Appraisal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The gastrointestinal tract digests and absorbs dietary nutrients, protects the body against physical and chemical damage from contents in its lumen, provides immunity against external antigens, and keeps an optimum environment for the gut microbiota. These functions cannot be performed normally in several diseases of which the following are discussed here: irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease, which includes Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Because these diseases are associated with oxidative stress, a host of antioxidant supplements are used for maintenance and recovery of the gut functions. However, the benefits of these supplements have not been established. The available 80 human trials were rated for levels of confidence and for benefits of the antioxidant supplements. For Crohn's disease, the supplements for which clear benefits occurred in at least 2 studies were allopurinol, Boswellia serrata (frankincense or shallaki), Artemesia species (wormwood), Tripterygium wilfordii (léi gōng téng), and omega-3 fatty acids. Similar beneficial supplements for ulcerative colitis were allopurinol, Matricaria chamomilla (chamomile), Curcuma longa (curcumin in turmeric), and omega-3 fatty acids. There was also a clear benefit for ulcerative colitis in 2 studies where a multiherbal Chinese medicine preparation and an Ayurvedic medicine preparation were used. For irritable bowel syndrome, there was only a marginal benefit of some of the antioxidant supplements. Thus, some antioxidant supplements may be beneficial at certain stages of specific diseases. This is consistent with the current concept that antioxidants act by inhibiting oxidative stress pathways in a tissue- and environment-specific manner and not by simply acting as scavengers.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".