Feasibility and Tolerability of Daily Pulse Consumption in Individuals with Peripheral Artery Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigated the feasibility, tolerability, and adherence of daily consumption of whole pulses (dried beans, peas, lentils, chickpeas) by individuals with peripheral artery disease participating in an 8-week study. Study questionnaires and semi-structured interviews for 26 participants were used to determine prestudy pulse consumption and participants' experiences with respect to adherence, positive and negative effects, bowel routine, satiety, and enjoyment of the foods. Although the majority of participants rarely consumed pulses prior to the study, there was a high rate of adherence to daily consumption of the study foods for 8 weeks despite comments regarding study fatigue during the latter part of the study. Participants had no gastrointestinal side effects (42%) or experienced flatulence that resolved by week 4 (23%), whereas 62% reported improvements in their bowel pattern. By week 8 greater satiety was noted by some participants (19%), with the categories "less afternoon snacking" and "not snacking" receiving more responses. The key finding of this study was that consumption of pulses is a viable approach for this population; however, the frequency of consumption that is tolerable in the long term should be integrated with the dose and timeframe required to achieve and maintain health benefits.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".