The effects of curcumin‐containing supplements on biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Besides other benefits, curcumin is getting more recognized for its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, highlighting the importance of curcumin application for chronic disease prevention. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to assess the influence of curcumin-containing supplements on biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched till January 2018 for eligible studies. The selected studies were evaluated for their quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and relevant data were extracted from included studies. Data were pooled using the inverse variance method and expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Fifteen RCTs were included in the final analysis. The meta-analysis indicated that curcumin supplementation significantly decreased interleukin 6 (IL-6) (SMD -2.08; 95% CI [-3.90, -0.25]; p = 0.02), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) (SMD -0.65; 95% CI [-1.20, -0.10], p = 0.02), and malondialdehyde (MDA) concentrations (SMD -3.14; 95% CI [-4.76, -1.53], p < 0.001). Though, curcumin supplementation had no significant effect on tumor necrosis factor-alpha (SMD -1.62; 95% CI [-3.60, 0.36]; p = 0.10) and superoxide dismutase levels (SMD 0.34; 95% CI [-1.06, 1.74], p = 0.63). Overall, this meta-analysis suggests that taking curcumin-containing supplements may exert anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties through a significant reduction in IL-6, hs-CRP, and MDA levels.
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 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 | 0.021 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it