MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000492500 · doi:10.1093/cdn/nzaa005

Gastrointestinal Tolerance and Microbiome Response to Snacks Fortified with Pea Hull Fiber: A Randomized Trial in Older Adults

2020· article· en· W3000492500 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsPerkinElmer Biosignal
FundersNational Institute of Food and AgricultureSecretaría de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e InnovaciónInstitute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of FloridaMinistry of Higher EducationUniversity of Florida
KeywordsFlatulenceBloatingMedicineFecesCrossover studyInternal medicineGastroenterologyRandomized controlled trialMicrobiomeAppetiteConstipationPlaceboAbdominal painBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consuming foods with added fiber may help older adults achieve fiber recommendations; however, many high-fiber ingredients have little effect on laxation and may contribute to unpleasant gastrointestinal side effects. The aim of the study was to determine the effects of consuming snacks fortified with pea hull fiber (PHF) on stool frequency and form, gastrointestinal symptoms, and appetite in older adults. An exploratory aim was to determine if PHF altered the microbiota profile. A 10-wk, randomized, blinded, crossover study was carried out. Following a 2-wk baseline period, participants [aged (mean ± SD) 69.7 ± 6.5 y; n = 31; 14 men, 17 women] consumed snacks providing 10 g/d of PHF or a control, each for 2-wk periods followed by 2-wk washouts. Participants used the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS) to record daily stool frequency and gastrointestinal symptoms, and completed the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) and Simplified Nutritional Appetite Questionnaire (SNAQ) biweekly. One stool was collected per period for 16S ribosomal RNA high-throughput amplicon sequencing of the fecal microbiota profile. Participants reported 1.63 ± 0.05 stools/d and 76.6% normal transit stool form at baseline and no change with PHF. GSRS syndrome scores were similarly unchanged. Daily abdominal noises and bloating were higher for PHF versus control, and flatulence was higher for PHF versus baseline, suggesting fermentation in some individuals. There was no evidence to suggest a common PHF-induced microbiome response for the group as a whole; however, a subgroup of participants (n = 7) who responded with increased flatulence (fermenters), harbored many different taxa than nonfermenters, and demonstrated lower abundance of Clostridiales with PHF. Appetite was unchanged with PHF. PHF did not modulate stool form or frequency in older adults with normal bowel habits. Because snacks fortified with PHF did not suppress appetite, PHF may be an appropriate fiber source for older adults at nutritional risk. Microbiome profile may be predictive of gastrointestinal symptom response to PHF. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02778230.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.253 · 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