Review of Analytical Methods and Reporting of the Polyphenol Content of Tart Cherry Supplements in Human Supplementation Studies Investigating Health and Exercise Performance Effects: Recommendations for Good Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tart cherries (TC) are a rich source of polyphenols that elicit antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects. As a consequence, the effects of TC derived supplements on markers of human health, exercise performance and sleep have been investigated. Supplementation protocols have been highly variable across studies and the dose of bioactive compounds used has often been poorly characterized. Specific and non-specific analytical methods were employed for measuring the total polyphenol and anthocyanin content in TC supplements. This review critically analyses the supplementation protocols and the analytical methods used for the characterization of TC supplements, culminating in recommendations for good practice in the analysis and reporting of the polyphenol content and profile of TC products. A literature search was conducted using PubMed/Medline and Web of Science up to May 4th, 2020, including studies published in all years prior. Only articles written in English that provided a TC dietary supplement as opposed to fresh whole TC were included in this review. Forty-three studies were identified as eligible and included for analysis in this review. The studies investigated the effects of TC supplementation on various aspects of human health, exercise recovery and performance and sleep. Twenty studies conducted an analysis of TC supplement and reported total polyphenol/anthocyanin content. Six studies did not report the polyphenol content of the TC supplement used. Seventeen studies reported the TC supplement polyphenol content but this was derived from previously published studies and presumably different supplement batches. The duration of the supplementation protocol ranged from acute supplementation to 84 days, meanwhile the total polyphenol and anthocyanin dose ranged from 143 to 2,140 mg/day and 15 to 547 mg/day, respectively. Due to the variety of specific and non-specific analytical methods used, the relative efficacy of different doses and polyphenol blends cannot reliably be extrapolated from critical analysis of the literature. Future studies should conduct an analysis of the study supplement batch. In addition to analysis and reporting of total polyphenol content, specific analytical methods such as HPLC UV/MS should be used to quantify total and individual anthocyanin contents.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".