MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016500090 · doi:10.1055/s-0040-1709129

Flaxseed and Its Components in Treatment of Hyperlipidemia and Cardiovascular Disease

2020· review· en· W3016500090 on OpenAlexaff
Kailash Prasad, Amal Khan, Muhammad Shoker

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Angiology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytoestrogen effects and research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperlipidemiaBlood lipidsCholesterolHigh-density lipoproteinLinseed oilLipoproteinInternal medicineMedicineFood scienceEndocrinologyChemistryBiochemistryDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the effects of flaxseed and its components (flax oil, secoisolariciresinoldiglucoside[SDG], flax lignan complex [FLC], and flax fibers] on serum lipids (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides [TG]) in animals and humans. Ordinary flaxseed reduces TG, TC, LDL-C, and TC/HDL-C levels in a dose-dependent manner in animals. In humans, it reduces serum lipids in hypercholesterolemicpatients but has no effects in normocholesterolemicpatients. Flax oil has variable effects on serum lipids in normo- and hypercholesterolemic animals. Flax oil treatment, with a dosage containing greater than 25 g/day of α-linolenic acid, reduces serum lipids in humans. Although FLC reduces serum lipids and raises serum HDL-C in animals, its effects on serum lipids in humans are small and variable. Flax fibers exert small effects on serum lipids in humans. Crop Development Centre (CDC)-flaxseed, which contains low concentrations of α-linolenic acid, has significant lipid lowering effects in animals. Pure SDG has potent hypolipidemic effects and raises HDL-C. In conclusion, flaxseed and pure SDG have significant lipid-lowering effects in animals and humans, while other components of flaxseed have small and variable effects.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of AngiologySame topicPhytoestrogen effects and researchFrench-language works237,207