MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402701693 · doi:10.1016/j.ajcnut.2024.09.019

The effects of chicory inulin-type fructans supplementation on weight management outcomes: systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials

2024· review· en· W4402701693 on OpenAlexaff
Raylene A. Reimer, Stephan Theis, Yoghatama Cindya Zanzer

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicMicrobial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisMeta-regressionInulinRandomized controlled trialSystematic reviewFructanMedicineBiologyInternal medicineFood scienceMEDLINEBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Excess body weight and adiposity can adversely affect metabolic health. Prebiotics such as inulin-type fructans (ITFs) from chicory root are known to modulate gut microbiota and may improve body weight regulation. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess evidence for chicory ITF supplementation to support weight management. METHODS: Eligible articles (initial search to 2021, updated to February 2023) were searched from EMBASE, MEDLINE (PubMed), and Cochrane Library. Data on primary (body weight) and secondary outcomes [body mass index (BMI), total fat mass, body fat percentage, and waist circumference] were extracted by 2 reviewers independently. Random-effects model using inverse-variance method was used. Subgroup analysis (health status and ITF type) and meta-regression (dose and duration) were evaluated. RESULTS: : 75%), all other outcomes had negligible to moderate heterogeneity. Significant reduction in body weight, BMI, and waist circumference was evident irrespective of participants' health status. There was minimal evidence that dose, duration, or type of ITF influenced the magnitude of reductions in outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Chicory ITF supplementation may benefit weight management by reducing body weight, BMI, fat mass, waist circumference, and, to a certain extent, body fat percentage. This systematic review with meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42020184908.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0270.042
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.382 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical NutritionSame topicMicrobial Metabolites in Food BiotechnologyFrench-language works237,207