MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285009406 · doi:10.3390/nu14142806

The Use of Dietary Supplements and Amino Acid Restriction Interventions to Reduce Frailty in Pre-Clinical Models

2022· review· en· W4285009406 on OpenAlexafffund
Elise S. Bisset, Susan E. Howlett

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDalhousie Medical Research FoundationHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicineGerontologyFrailty syndromeVitamin D and neurologyEnvironmental healthFrailty IndexInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frailty is a state of accelerated aging that increases susceptibility to adverse health outcomes. Due to its high societal and personal costs, there is growing interest in discovering beneficial interventions to attenuate frailty. Many of these interventions involve the use of lifestyle modifications such as dietary supplements. Testing these interventions in pre-clinical models can facilitate our understanding of their impact on underlying mechanisms of frailty. We conducted a narrative review of studies that investigated the impact of dietary modifications on measures of frailty or overall health in rodent models. These interventions include vitamin supplements, dietary supplements, or amino acid restriction diets. We found that vitamins, amino acid restriction diets, and dietary supplements can have beneficial effects on frailty and other measures of overall health in rodent models. Mechanistic studies show that these effects are mediated by modifying one or more mechanisms underlying frailty, in particular effects on chronic inflammation. However, many interventions do not measure frailty directly and most do not investigate effects in both sexes, which limits their applicability. Examining dietary interventions in animal models allows for detailed investigation of underlying mechanisms involved in their beneficial effects. This may lead to more successful, translatable interventions to attenuate frailty.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.410
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.060 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207