Effects of the Mediterranean diet on the metabolic syndrome in men and women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the impact of a 4‐week eucaloric controlled nutritional intervention based on the traditional Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) on the metabolic syndrome (MetS) in men and women. Methods Participants were 37 men and 32 premenopausal women who had a slightly elevated plasma LDL‐cholesterol concentration (between 3.4 and 4.9 mM) and at least one factor of the MetS. During the intervention, all foods and drinks concordant with the MedDiet were provided to participants. The MetS was assessed before and after the controlled intervention as defined by the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III criteria. Results At baseline, 43.2% of men and 37.5% of women had the MetS. The prevalence of the MetS was reduced by 13.5% in men and was increased by 3.1% in women (men vs women, P=0.14). The reversion of the MetS was 3.5 times greater in men than in women, however this odds ratio was not significant (95% confidence interval, 0.67–18.24). No significant change was observed in the number of criteria of the MetS in women (P=1.00) whereas a trend was noted in men (P=0.08). Conclusion A 4‐week controlled nutritional intervention based on the MedDiet does not lead to significant changes in the MetS in women, although men tend to have beneficial effects in response to this intervention. Supported by CIHR and HSFQ
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".