MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283321575 · doi:10.3390/nu14132577

Association between Dietary Macronutrient Intake and Symptoms in Uninvestigated Dyspepsia: Evidence from a Population-Based, Cross-Sectional Study

2022· article· en· W4283321575 on OpenAlexaff
Shahram Agah, Azadeh Aminianfar, Ammar Hassanzadeh Keshteli, Vida Bitarafan, Peyman Adibi, Ahmad Esmaillzadeh, Christine Feinle‐Bisset

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilTehran University of Medical Sciences and Health ServicesIsfahan University of Medical SciencesIran University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsCross-sectional studyMedicinePopulationEnvironmental healthInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(1) Background: Limited evidence from laboratory-based studies suggests that specific dietary macronutrients, particularly fat, can induce dyspeptic symptoms. Through a population-based study, we investigated the relationship between dietary macronutrients and dyspeptic symptoms and sought to determine macronutrient intake thresholds to predict or prevent dyspepsia and reduce symptoms in patients with dyspepsia. (2) Methods: A total of 4763 Iranian people were enrolled in this population-based, cross-sectional study. Uninvestigated dyspepsia (UD) and its symptoms, including postprandial fullness, early satiation, and epigastric pain, were evaluated using a modified Persian version of the Rome III criteria. The dietary intakes of participants were evaluated using a validated food−frequency questionnaire. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to calculate threshold intakes of dietary macronutrients to prevent UD in the general population. The analysis was then repeated in those with UD to calculate intake thresholds for reducing UD symptoms. (3) Results: Early satiation occurred in 6.3% (n = 302), postprandial fullness in 8.0% (n = 384) and epigastric pain in 7.8% (n = 371) of participants. The prevalence of UD was 15.2%. Compared with individuals without UD, those with UD had a lower intake of carbohydrates (48.2% vs. 49.1%) and a higher intake of fats (38.3% vs. 37.4%), while protein and energy intakes did not differ. Higher dietary fat and protein intakes were associated with a higher prevalence of postprandial fullness and epigastric pain, respectively. Macronutrient intakes to predict UD in the general population were <49% of energy from carbohydrates, >14.7% from protein, and >37.7% from fats. Carbohydrate, protein, and fat intakes to prevent symptoms among those with UD were calculated to be >48.2%, <14.6%, and <38.6%, respectively. (4) Conclusion: Higher carbohydrate intake and lower fat or protein intakes were associated with a lower likelihood of UD. Prospective studies carefully manipulating dietary macronutrient composition are warranted to investigate the value of dietary changes to improve symptoms in people with UD.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicGastrointestinal motility and disordersFrench-language works237,207