MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183983224 · doi:10.3390/nu13082546

Highly Active Cranberry’s Polyphenolic Fraction: New Advances in Processing and Clinical Applications

2021· review· en· W3183983224 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alessandro Colletti, Luciano Sangiorgio, Alma Martelli, Lara Testai, Arrigo F.G. Cicero, Giancarlo Cravotto

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersI.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical UniversityUniversità degli Studi di Torino
KeywordsTolerabilityNutraceuticalContext (archaeology)Clinical trialPolyphenolMedicinePharmacologyChemistryAdverse effectBiologyInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cranberry is a fruit originally from New England and currently growing throughout the east and northeast parts of the USA and Canada. The supplementation of cranberry extracts as nutraceuticals showed to contribute to the prevention of urinary tract infections, and most likely it may help to prevent cardiovascular and gastroenteric diseases, as highlighted by several clinical trials. However, aiming to validate the efficacy and safety of clinical applications as long-term randomized clinical trials (RCTs), further investigations of the mechanisms of action are required. In addition, a real challenge for next years is the standardization of cranberry's polyphenolic fractions. In this context, the optimization of the extraction process and downstream processing represent a key point for a reliable active principle for the formulation of a food supplement. For this reason, new non-conventional extraction methods have been developed to improve the quality of the extracts and reduce the overall costs. The aim of this survey is to describe both technologies and processes for highly active cranberry extracts as well as the effects observed in clinical studies and the respective tolerability notes.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207