Effects of the Mediterranean diet with and without weight loss on eating behaviors in men with metabolic syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the impact of the Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) consumed under controlled feeding conditions in the absence and presence of weight loss on eating behaviors as measured by the Three‐Factor‐Eating‐Questionnaire in men with metabolic syndrome (MetS). Nineteen men, aged between 24 and 62 years with MetS (NCEP‐ATPIII criteria) first consumed a 5‐week standardized North American control diet followed by a 5‐week MedDiet both under weight‐maintaining conditions. This was followed by a 20‐week caloric restriction weight loss period in free‐living conditions. Participants were finally subjected to a 5‐week weight‐loss maintenance phase during which they consumed the MedDiet under controlled feeding isoenergetic conditions. The MedDiet in the absence of weight loss had no impact on eating behaviors. Body weight reduction by caloric restriction (−10% of initial weight) increased dietary total restraint (p<0.0001), rigid restraint (p=0.003) and attitude to self‐regulation (p=0.05) and reduced disinhibition (p=0.02) and susceptibility to hunger (p=0.01). Feeding the MedDiet for 5 weeks under isoenergetic conditions after the weight loss phase had no further impact on eating behaviors. These data suggest that consumption of the MedDiet has no effect on eating behaviors, unless it is accompanied by significant weight loss.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".