MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Insulin‐Independent Mechanisms of Action of Pre‐Meal Consumption of Whey Protein on Post‐meal Glycemic Response in Healthy Adults

2012· article· en· W3175972668 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tina Akhavan, Bohdan L. Luhovyy, Peter H. Brown, G. Harvey Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMealGlycemicAmylinInsulinInternal medicineMedicineEndocrinologyIncretinType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusIslet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whey protein (WP) when consumed prior to a meal reduces post‐meal glycemic response (Akhavan et al, AJCN, 2010). The objective of the study was to identify insulin‐independent mechanisms of action. Healthy men received, in a randomized order, WP and glucose preloads (10 and 20 g/300 mL) and water control with paracetamol (1.5 g). At 30 min after consumption, the subjects were fed a preset pizza meal (12 kcal/ kg). Plasma concentrations of paracetamol, glucose and incretin hormones, involved in glycemic control, were measured at pre‐ (0–30) and post‐ (50–230 min) meal. Pre‐meal plasma paracetamol concentrations were reduced by WP, indicating delayed gastric emptying. Consumption of WP and glucose similarly reduced post‐meal plasma glucose but insulin was increased only after glucose preloads (p < 0.001). Associated with the lower post‐meal glycemic responses after WP were lower C‐peptide and higher GLP‐1, PYY and ghrelin (all p < 0.001), but similar amylin and GIP than after glucose preloads. These responses support the hypothesis the glycemic control after WP occurs in part by noninsulin dependent mechanisms. Thus, pre‐meal consumption of WP may be a novel strategy, comparable to pharmacological therapy e.g. sulphonylureas, for the prevention and treatment of hyperglycemia and type 2 diabetes. Grant Funding Source : Supported by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada‐Collaborative Research and Development and Kraft Canada Inc

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicMuscle metabolism and nutrition→French-language works237,207→