Mechanism and Potential of Egg Consumption and Egg Bioactive Components on Type-2 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type-2 diabetes (T2D) is one of the major global health challenges and a substantial economic burden. Egg and egg-derived components have been indicated to possess antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-hypertensive, immunomodulatory, and anti-cancer activities. However, the scientific evidence about the benefits of egg on T2D is debatable. The relationship between egg consumption and the risk of T2D from observational epidemiological studies is not consistent. Interventional clinical studies, however, provide promising evidence that egg consumption ameliorates the risk of T2D. Current research progress also indicates that some egg components and egg-derived peptides might be beneficial in the context of T2D, in terms of insulin secretion and sensitivity, oxidative stress, and inflammation, suggesting possible application on T2D management. The current review summarizes recent clinical investigations related to the influence of egg consumption on T2D risk and in vivo and in vitro studies on the effect and mechanism of egg components and egg-derived peptides on T2D.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".