MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401799159 · doi:10.1016/j.tjnut.2024.08.017

Potatoes Compared with Rice in Meals with either Animal or Plant Protein Reduce Postprandial Glycemia and Increase Satiety in Healthy Adults: A Randomized Crossover Study

2024· article· en· W4401799159 on OpenAlexafffund
Amira M. Amr, G. Harvey Anderson, Shirley Vien, Hrvoje Fabek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nutrition · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsMedical Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPostprandialMedicineFood scienceAppetiteBiologyInsulinEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Rice and pasta are recommended as healthier than potatoes on the basis of their glycemic index when eaten alone. OBJECTIVES: The study objective was to evaluate postprandial glycemia (PPG), appetite, and food intake (FI) at meals with potatoes or rice when consumed with either meatballs or their vegetarian substitute. METHODS: ]: 18.5-29.9) consumed isocaloric fixed amounts of either meatballs or vegetarian-substitute balls with ad libitum access to either baked French fries (BFF), instant mashed potatoes (IMPs), or rice (control). FI was measured at the meal and at an ad libitum pizza meal served 120 min later. Blood glucose (BG), appetite, and plasma insulin responses were measured within the meal (0-30 min), postmeal (30-120 min), within pizza meal (120-140 min), and post-pizza (140-170 min). Effects of protein source, carbohydrate (CHO) source, and sex and their interactions were analyzed using analysis of variance followed by Tukey's post hoc test. RESULTS: Participants consumed 23-25% less treatment meal energy (kcal), 32-34% less CHO energy (kcal), and 13-16% less total energy (kcal) after the BFF and IMP than rice meals (P < 0.0001). Postmeal BG was lower after IMP (6.76 ± 0.15; P < 0.0001) and rice (6.92 ± 0.15; P = 0.0012) compared with BFF (7.19 ± 0.15). Post-pizza BG was higher after rice (6.77 ± 0.09) than that after BFF (6.51 ± 0.09; P = 0.0012) and IMP (6.39 ± 0.09; P < 0.0001). Postmeal meaned insulin was higher after BFF (82.16 ± 8.58) and IMP (77.75 ± 8.60) compared with rice (56.44 ± 8.59; P < 0.002). Insulin during pizza meal was lower after BFF (17.14 ± 6.90) compared with both IMP (39.03 ± 6.90; P = 0.0060) and rice (34.21 ± 6.90; P = 0.0336). Meatballs led to lower BG (6.48 ± 0.09; P = 0.0076) and higher insulin (84.54 ± 5.87; P = 0.0406) post-pizza compared with their plant protein substitute (6.64 ± 0.09 and 73.18 ± 5.87, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Adults consuming meatballs or plant-based substitute with ad libitum IMP had lower PPG post-treatment and at a later pizza meal compared with rice. Both IMP and BFF resulted in lower energy intake than after rice. This trial was registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov (https://register. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S000CKIJ&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0000IA4&ts=2&cx=-uf51kf) as NCT05610124. Protocol ID: 43406 (Postprandial Glycemia and Satiety of Meals with Potatoes, with and without Protein).

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NutritionSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207