<i>Hibiscus sabdariffa</i> tea affects diet-induced thermogenesis and subjective satiety responses in healthy men but not in women: a randomized crossover trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of Hibiscus sabdariffa tea on energy expenditure, satiety response and food intake. This is an open-label, crossover, randomized clinical trial that comprised 21 subjects (11 women, 10 men). The individuals were evaluated at acute moments (fasting and after eating standardized breakfast accompanied by water or H. sabdariffa tea). Resting energy expenditure was measured by indirect calorimetry, subjective satiety responses were evaluated with a visual analogue scale and food intake was assessed by using food records. The volunteers who drank the H. sabdariffa tea had lower perception of hunger (p = 0.002) and greater feeling of satiety (p = 0.01) and fullness (p = 0.009) compared to control. Men who ingested the H. sabdariffa tea had an increase in nitrogen energy expenditure (water: 1501 ± 290.7 kcal, H. sabdariffa tea: 1619 ± 288.9 kcal; p = 0.029). In comparison to control, men presented less perception of hunger (p = 0.003) and desire to eat (p = 0.016), increased satiety (p = 0.021) and fullness (p = 0.01), and women oxidized more fat (p = 0.034) when they drank H. sabdariffa tea. There was no difference between treatments regarding the energy and macronutrient intake from the first meal and throughout the day (p > 0.05) for all participants. The H. sabdariffa tea only affected energy expenditure and satiety responses in men. Clinical trial registry: ReBEC Platform of the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry ( https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/ ) – RBR-5HZ86T. Novelty: H. sabdariffa tea promoted an increase in energy expenditure and caused less perception of hunger/desire to eat in men. H. sabdariffa tea intake increased postprandial fat oxidation in women.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".