Dietary adherence to the Mediterranean diet pattern in a randomized clinical trial of patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The Mediterranean diet pattern (MDP) is believed to improve health and promote balanced inflammation and metabolism. While unknown, compelling evidence suggests that MDP could benefit patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We aimed to evaluate the level of diet adherence, diet quality, and nutritional adequacy of the MDP in patients with Ulcerative Colitis (UC). Methods Adult participants (n = 32) with quiescent UC were randomized to follow a MDP (n = 18) or Canadian Habitual Diet (CHD) (n = 14) for 12 weeks. The MDP participants received tailored nutrition education from a Registered Dietitian. Demographic, clinical data, medical history, and quality of life were assessed with the Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ), dietary adherence with the Mediterranean Diet Serving Score (MDSS), diet quality via the Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015), and dietary intake (ASA-24) were completed at baseline and week 12. Results Participants’ diets were analyzed (MDP n = 15, CHD n = 13). The MDP (n = 10, 67%) achieved a high level of adherence (MDSS score between 16 and 24) vs. CHD (n = 3), (p = 0.030). HEI-2015 significantly increased from baseline to week 12 (p = 0.007) in the MDP and was significantly higher at week 12 compared to the CHD (p = 0.0001). The SIBDQ (bowel domain) showed reductions in the passage of large amounts of gas (p = 0.01) and improvements in tenesmus (p = 0.03) in the MDP. Despite enhanced diet quality and adherence in the MDP, females had inadequate intakes of calcium, iron, vitamin D, vitamin E, and choline and males had inadequate intakes of fiber, vitamin D, vitamin E, and choline. No adverse events were reported. Conclusion With nutrition education, high adherence to the MDP was achieved without an increase in bowel symptoms. Following the MDP led to a higher diet quality; however, nutritional inadequacies were identified. Tailored dietary education focusing on nutrients of concern when following the MDP is recommended to ensure nutritional adequacy. Clinical trial registration [ www.ClinicalTrials.gov ], identifier [NCT03053713].
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".