MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804293659 · doi:10.1016/j.pcad.2018.05.004

Portfolio Dietary Pattern and Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Controlled Trials

2018· review· en· W2804293659 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Cardiovascular Diseases · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisInternal medicineConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialCochrane LibraryNational Cholesterol Education ProgramClinical trialDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyMetabolic syndromeObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evidence for the Portfolio dietary pattern, a plant-based dietary pattern that combines recognized cholesterol-lowering foods (nuts, plant protein, viscous fibre, plant sterols), has not been summarized. To update the European Association for the Study of Diabetes clinical practice guidelines for nutrition therapy, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials using GRADE of the effect of the Portfolio dietary pattern on the primary therapeutic lipid target for cardiovascular disease prevention, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and other established cardiometabolic risk factors. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library through April 19, 2018. We included controlled trials ≥ 3-weeks assessing the effect of the Portfolio dietary pattern on cardiometabolic risk factors compared with an energy-matched control diet free of Portfolio dietary pattern components. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcome was LDL-C. Data were pooled using the generic inverse-variance method and expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed (Cochran Q statistic) and quantified (I2-statistic). GRADE assessed the certainty of the evidence. Eligibility criteria were met by 7 trial comparisons in 439 participants with hyperlipidemia, in which the Portfolio dietary pattern was given on a background of a National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Step II diet. The combination of a portfolio dietary pattern and NCEP Step II diet significantly reduced the primary outcome LDL-C by ~17% (MD, −0.73 mmol/L, [95% CI, −0.89 to −0.56 mmol/L]) as well as non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, triglycerides, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, C-reactive protein, and estimated 10-year coronary heart disease (CHD) risk, compared with an NCEP Step 2 diet alone (p < 0.05). There was no effect on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol or body weight. The certainty of the evidence was high for LDL-cholesterol and most lipid outcomes and moderate for all others outcomes. Current evidence demonstrates that the Portfolio dietary pattern leads to clinically meaningful improvements in LDL-C as well as other established cardiometabolic risk factors and estimated 10-year CHD risk.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0360.034
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it