MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965450014 · doi:10.1093/cdn/nzz083

Impact of a High Intake of Dairy Product on Insulin Sensitivity in Hyperinsulinemic Adults: A Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial

2019· article· en· W2965450014 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah O’Connor, Pierre Julien, S. John Weisnagel, Claudia Gagnon, Iwona Rudkowska

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDiabetes Canada
KeywordsCrossover studyInsulin sensitivityRandomized controlled trialMedicineProduct (mathematics)InsulinInternal medicineFood scienceInsulin resistanceEndocrinologyBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dairy product intake has been associated with decreased risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in cohort studies. However, results from clinical trials on T2D-related risk factors remain inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this clinical trial was to evaluate the impact of high dairy product intake (HD) (≥4 servings/d) for 6 wk, compared with an adequate dairy product intake (AD) (≤2 servings/d), on glycemic and insulinemic parameters, insulin sensitivity, insulin secretion, and β-cell function in hyperinsulinemic adults. METHODS: In this crossover clinical trial, hyperinsulinemic adults were randomly assigned to HD or AD for 6 wk, then crossed over after a 6-wk washout period. Serum glucose, insulin, C-peptide, HOMA-IR, Matsuda index, insulinogenic index, and disposition index were measured and analyzed using a repeated-measures mixed model adjusted for age, sex, and BMI. Anthropometric measures were collected and food intake was evaluated using a validated FFQ. RESULTS: . Dairy product intake was 5.8 servings/d in the HD condition and 2.3 servings/d in the AD condition after 6 wk. No difference was observed between HD and AD after 6 wk for all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: HD does not affect glycemic and insulinemic parameters, insulin sensitivity, insulin secretion, and β-cell function over AD in hyperinsulinemic adults. Additional larger and longer studies assessing T2D-related risk factors are required. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02961179.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Developments in NutritionSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207