The relationship between fruit and vegetable intake with functional dyspepsia in adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The association of fruit and vegetables with functional dyspepsia (FD) has been less studied, especially in Middle Eastern populations. This study investigated the relationship between fruit and vegetable consumption with FD and its related symptoms among a large group of Iranian adults. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This cross-sectional research was conducted on 3362 middle-age participants. Usual dietary intakes, including fruit and vegetable intake, during the last year were assessed using a validated 106-item dish-based food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). A modified Persian version of the Rome III questionnaire was used for assessment of FD. RESULTS: The prevalence of FD among study participants was 14.5%. After adjustment for confounders, the highest energy-adjusted tertile of fruit consumption was related to 32% lower risk of FD, compared to the lowest intake (OR = 0.68, 95% CI:0.51-0.90). Fruit consumption was also significantly related to lower risk of early satiation (OR = 0.67, 95% CI:0.54-0.85) and post-prandial fullness (OR = 0.75, 95% CI:0.61-0.92). Vegetable consumption was not related to the risk of FD in all models. Men who were in the third tertile of fruit and the third tertile vegetable consumption had lower risk of FD compared to the first tertile; but, in women, just fruit consumption was related to the reduced risk of FD, after adjustment for all confounders. CONCLUSION: We found an inverse association between fruit intake and dyspepsia symptoms. In addition, high consumption of fruit was related to lower odds of early satiation and post-prandial fullness. Higher intake of vegetables was associated with lower risk of FD, only in men.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".