Comparison of Canola and Soybean Oils on Serum Lipid and Glucose Profiles and Anthropometric Parameters in Overweight and Obese Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background No earlier human study compared influences of canola and soybean oils on patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Current study aimed to investigate effects of canola and soya oils on blood and anthropometric parameters in overweight and obese Iranian diabetic (II) patients. Methods A total of sixty-six T2D subjects were randomly allocated to three groups. Canola oil (CO; n 23, received 30g canola oil); Soya oil (SO; n 19, received 30g soya oil) and control group (n 24, their usual intake of dietary oils) for 8 weeks. Lipid and glycemic profiles as well as anthropometric indicators were evaluated before and after the intervention. Repeated-measures ANOVA was used to evaluate time×group interactions for the outcome variables followed by a t test (significance level, p < 0.05). Results After 8 weeks, serum total cholesterol (-21.3 and -36.4v. -2.2 mg/dl; P=0·007), low density lipoprotein (-6.6 and -15.9v. +3.0 mg/dl; P=0·013), fasting blood sugar (-39.6 and -30.5v. +11.7 mg/dl; P<0.001) significantly decreased and high density lipoprotein (+3.0 and +3.5v. +2.4 mg/dl; P=0.038) significantly increased in CO and SO groups compared with controls. Changes in lipid profiles were more considerable in the soybean oil group than the canola oil group. The mean changes of waist circumference (WC; −4.1 v. -1.4 and -1.3 cm; P=0·031) and weight (−3.1 v. -0.3 and +0.5 kg; P=0·048) significantly decreased in canola group comparing to the two other groups. Conclusions Current study showed that daily consumption of canola and soybean oil for 8 weeks improved serum levels of fasting blood sugar, total cholesterol, low density lipoprotein and high density lipoprotein in T2D patients. Changes were more considerable in those consumed soybean oil. Canola oil decreased central obesity indices (waist circumference and weight) in T2D patients. Further studies are needed to shed light on this issue. Trial registration: The trial registration number at irct.ir is IRCT2012062510110N1. Registered 23 July 2012. Retrospectively registered. https://fa.irct.ir/search/result?query=IRCT2012062510110N1
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".