MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effects of lemon verbena extract and hydrolyzed collagen supplementation, either alone or in combination, on subjects with mild arthritis of the knee joints

2021· article· en· W3166300661 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Purpura, R Jäger, Karim Balan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBee Products Chemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsIngredion (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisPlaceboWOMACArthritisInternal medicineMicrocrystalline celluloseCellulose

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Extracts of lemon verbena have anti‐inflammatory and anti‐oxidant properties and may represent a safe nutritional alternative to improve joint health and mobility in subjects with osteoarthritis. Previous research has shown that the administration of 10 grams of collagen hydrolysate per day for at least 3 months has a beneficial impact on pain symptoms and joint function. This study examined the impact of administering low‐dose hydrolyzed collagen (HC), standardized lemon verbena extract (LV), and a combination of both ingredients (LV+HC) on joint health in individuals with osteoarthritis of the knee. Methods A double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, randomized human study in volunteers with mild arthritis of the knee joints was performed. Subjects either received 5 g of HC (Fortigel, Gelita AG, Eberbach, Germany, n = 20), 1 g of LV (Lemon verbena extract, standardized to 10% anoxymins, n = 18), 1 g of LV plus 5 g of HC (LV+HC, n = 20) or placebo (PLA, 5 g microcrystalline cellulose, n = 17) for a period of six month. Treatment effects on perceived pain and functionality were evaluated at weeks 0 (pre‐test), 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 and 24 (post‐test) using the Lequesne index, in addition to a weekly assessment by the WOMAC Index. Results The Lequesne score‐difference index showed faster significant improvements (p<0.05) in the LV and LV+HC groups (week 6) in comparison to HC (week 9) and PLA (week 18) and higher individual responder rates (defined as score difference ≥3.5 compared to baseline), reaching 70% at the end of study for the LV+HC group, compared to 38% for LV and 64% for HC. The LV+HC group showed greater improvements in mobility and knee‐function in comparison to the individual ingredients (LV+HC 37%, LV 26%, HC 28%). The faster onset of beneficial effects in the LV+HC group was confirmed by the WOMAC index. Conclusion: Supplementation of HC, LV or a combination of LV and HC can significantly improve parameters of pain and functionality in subjects with mild arthritis of knee joint. Combining HC with an anti‐inflammatory ingredient might increase the responder rate and decrease the time needed for the onset of the beneficial 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicBee Products Chemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207