MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213046630 · doi:10.3390/nu14040821

Health Benefits of Apple Juice Consumption: A Review of Interventional Trials on Humans

2022· review· en· W4213046630 on OpenAlexafffund
Bastien Vallée Marcotte, Marie Verheyde, Sonia Pomerleau, Alain Doyen, Charles Couillard

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersUniversité Laval
KeywordsHealth benefitsDiseaseMedicineConsumption (sociology)Oxidative stressFruit juiceClinical trialDiabetes mellitusHuman healthEnvironmental healthFood scienceBiologyTraditional medicinePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although numerous studies have reported the benefits of apple consumption on cardiometabolic health parameters and chronic disease prevention, few have focused on the effects of apple juice specifically. Juice consumption may be a convenient way to take advantage of the health effects of the bioactive components present in apples. The present review aims to summarize the current literature on health benefits of apple juice as reported in clinical trials in humans. Of the 67 studies retained, 20 interventional studies on humans were reviewed. Overall, cloudy apple juice consumption was found to be associated with several markers of cardiovascular health that may ultimately be relevant for cancer and neurodegenerative diseases. Most of the documentation was found regarding oxidative stress, as well as observations with other parameters such as markers of inflammation, lipid profile, and diabetes. This review suggests that, in 20 studies, apple juice consumed in moderation exerts positive effects on markers of cardiovascular disease risk (particularly on oxidative stress).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.265
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations99
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207