Oral Bran in Patients With Quiescent Ulcerative Colitis: Another Piece in the Diet Puzzle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“What food should I eat?…. what food should I avoid?”. Very common questions that we all hear from our patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The role of diet in the pathogenesis of IBD through its effect on the intestinal microbiome is extremely important and has been the focus of basic and clinical research for years.1 The efficacy of several diets in the induction and maintaining remission of IBD has been under investigation. Nonetheless, only the exclusive enteral nutrition using elemental or polymeric formulas has been proven effective in induction of remission with a questionable value as a supplementary feed for maintenance of remission for Crohn’s disease.2–4 However, adherence to this diet can be challenging mainly because of exclusivity.1 A step toward improving adherence has been the introduction of a more tolerable diet, the Crohn’s disease exclusion diet, in a recent article by Levine et al.5 The Crohn’s disease exclusion diet includes a list of disallowed foods including gluten, yeast, dairy products, red meat (animal fat), processed meats, and products containing emulsifiers; it is a low-sugar but not low-carbohydrate diet with 18–20 g of fiber per day.5 On the other hand, the role of diet in managing ulcerative colitis (UC) has been under-investigated with less promising results as compared to Crohn’s disease. In an attempt to examine the role of diet in patients with UC, Nyman et al.6 randomized a group of adult patients with quiescent UC to either receive oral bran or low-fiber wheat products for 24 weeks. Oral bran seemed to increase fecal butyrate, lower serum low-density lipoprotein, and maintained no gastrointestinal symptoms. The number of relapses, however, was the same in both groups at the end of the follow-up period, which may be related to the sub-optimal concentration of fecal butyrate. Although the study is limited by the small sample size, high number of dropouts, and lack of studying associated changes in the intestinal microbiome, it adds an important piece of knowledge to the growing body of literature that investigates the role of diet in IBD. Funding: None. Conflict of Interest: W.E.M. served as an advisory board member for Janssen and AbbVie Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".