Fruit and Vegetable Consumption and Frailty: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify currently available evidence on fruit and vegetable consumption in association with frailty by conducting a systematic review of the literature and to summarise and critically evaluate it. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: Four electronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO) were systematically searched in August 2017 for observational cohort studies providing cross-sectional or prospective associations between fruit and vegetable consumption and frailty risks. Additional studies were searched by manually reviewing the reference lists of the included studies and related review papers and conducting forward citation tracking of the included studies. The methodological quality of prospective studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling general populations. RESULTS: A total of 6251 studies were identified, of which five prospective studies with follow-up periods of 2-10.5 years and two cross-sectional studies were included. Among the five prospective studies, three had adequate methodological quality. Because of different measurements and statistical methodologies, a meta-analysis was not possible. The two studies of good quality showed that fruit and vegetable consumption was mostly associated with lower risk of incident frailty. The other study as a sub-analysis retrospectively examined baseline fruit and vegetable consumption of those who developed frailty and those who did not at follow-up and showed no significant associations. CONCLUSIONS: Although good quality studies on this topic are scarce, there is some suggestion that higher fruit and vegetable consumption may be associated with lower frailty risk. More high quality research is needed.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".