MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Long Term Effectiveness of A Dietary Portfolio of Cholesterol‐Lowering Foods in Hypercholesterolemic Subjects

2008· article· en· W3176480494 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cyril W.C. Kendall, Tri H. Nguyen, Nishant Fozdar, Dorothea Faulkner, Augustine Marchie, Julia MW Wong, Andrea R. Josse, Kristie Srichaikul, Edward Vidgen, Candice Holmes, Robert G. Josse, Lawrence A. Leiter, William Singer, David J.A. Jenkins

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersAlmond Board of California
KeywordsMedicineCholesterolLdl cholesterolSaturated fatPortfolioInternal medicineHyperlipidemiaEndocrinologyBusinessFinanceDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To determine the long term effectiveness of advice to consume a dietary portfolio of cholesterol‐lowering foods on risk factors for heart disease. Methods: Sixty‐six hyperlipidemic subjects were prescribed diets high in plant sterols (1.0 g/1000 kcal), soy protein (22.5 g/1000 kcal), viscous fibers (10 g/1000 kcal) and almonds (23 g/1000 kcal). Thirty subjects completed 3 years. Results: LDL‐cholesterol (LDL‐C) was significantly reduced at years 1, 2, and 3 with mean reductions of 17.7%, 11.2%, and 10.1%, respectively (P<0.01, n=30). HDL‐cholesterol (HDL‐C) was significantly raised at years 1, 2, and 3 with mean increases of 3.9%, 3.1% and 4.5%, respectively (P<0.01, n=30). Changes in LDL‐C significantly correlated with compliance to the dietary portfolio. Subjects with greater than 75% compliance to the dietary portfolio achieved a mean 24% reduction in LDL‐C. Conclusions: A sustained long term benefit of the dietary portfolio was seen in hyperlipidemic subjects with lower LDL‐C and raised HDL‐C over a 3‐year period. The effectiveness of the dietary portfolio was greater with >20% LDL‐C reductions seen in subjects having over 75% compliance. Funding: Canada Research Chair Endowment of the Federal Government of Canada; the Canadian Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; Loblaw Brands Limited; the Almond Board of California; Unilever Canada and Unilever Research & Development, Vlaardingen, The Netherlands; and Yves Veggie Cuisine.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicNutritional Studies and Diet→French-language works237,207→