Efficacy of Polydextrose Supplementation on Colonic Transit Time, Bowel Movements, and Gastrointestinal Symptoms in Adults: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The addition of fiber is one of the most important dietary means to relieve constipation through lifestyle modification. Polydextrose (PDX) has been reported in several studies to increase fecal bulk, soften stools, and increase the number of defecations. However, there are few studies on the effect of PDX on colonic transit time (CTT). Therefore, the aim of this study was to demonstrate the effect of PDX on CTT and other aspects of gastrointestinal function during two weeks (Day 1 to Day 14), preceded by a 2-week run-in period (Day -14 to Day -1). A total of 192 adults who were diagnosed with functional constipation per Rome III criteria were recruited for the study. Participants were randomized equally into 4 groups (12 g, 8 g, or 4 g of PDX or placebo per day). The primary endpoint was CTT, assessed using radio-opaque markers and abdominal X-rays on Day 0, the baseline; and Day 15, the end of the intervention. Secondary outcomes that were measured using inventories were the patient assessment of constipation symptoms and quality of life, bowel function index, relief of constipation, bowel movement frequency (BMF), stool consistency, degree of straining, and proportion of bowel movements. Ancillary parameters and harms were also evaluated. The recruited population was not sufficiently constipated (e.g., baseline values for CTT and BMF of 42 h and 8.7 BMF/week, respectively). Despite this limitation, our results demonstrated an increased number of bowel movements when supplemented with PDX at a dosage of 12 g per day for 2 weeks. This dosage also consistently improved the secondary outcomes that were measured using inventories at Day 15, compared with the baseline. No serious or significant adverse events were reported during the study.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".