Boiling for 15 minutes improves nutrient profiles in fishes included in the diets of dialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the effects of boiling on nutrient levels in fishes that have a relatively high phosphorus-to-protein ratio (PPR), which are important sources of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. We hypothesized that the beneficial effects of boiling for a shorter duration (15 min) on nutrient contents in fishes were similar to those of boiling for a longer duration (30 min), which has been shown to decrease the PPR in meat. METHODS: The protein, fat, and phosphorus contents and the PPR of three cooked fish species and their corresponding fish broths were chemically analyzed. The effects of boiling on changes in protein, fat, phosphorus, and the PPR was examined by comparing fish that were prepared with usual cooking methods (no boiling), boiled for 15 min, and boiled for 30 min. The nutrients in fish broths that were boiled for 15 min were also compared with those boiled for 30 min. FINDINGS: There were no significant differences in the changes in phosphorus, PPR, protein, and fat content in fish and fish broths prepared with the two boiling methods. In the fish boiled for 15 min, the phosphorus content was 24% lower (p = 0.001), and the PPR was 20% lower (p = 0.04) than those in nonboiled fish. Additionally, boiling for 30 min reduced the phosphorus content by 31% (p = 0.001), and the PPR by 27% (p = 0.04) compared to nonboiled fish, but the protein and fat contents were unchanged after both 15 and 30 min of boiling. DISCUSSION: The 15- and 30-min boiling methods resulted in a similar reduction in phosphorus and the PPR in fish, with minimal effects on protein and fat. A shorter duration of boiling is recommended to achieve better nutrient profiles in fishes consumed by dialysis patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".