Ten Recommendations for the Next Clinical Trial of the Mediterranean Diet in Inflamm-Aging: Results & Insights from a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diet is a key modifiable risk factor in many chronic diseases, including age-related diseases. The Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) is an extensively studied dietary pattern which has been proposed as a lifestyle intervention to promote healthy aging in the general population, due to its numerous health benefits. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have attempted to explore the mechanism(s) by which the MedDiet exerts its beneficial effects on aging. One proposed mechanism is that the MedDiet helps to slow down a process called 'inflamm-aging', a type of chronic, low-grade inflammation which contributes to aging. To explore the evidence supporting this hypothesized mechanism, we conducted a scoping review of existing RCTs which used a MedDiet intervention and assessed at least one molecular outcome of potential relevance to inflamm-aging. We identified 14 papers representing 12 unique RCTs. Based on our findings, we present 10 recommendations for the next clinical trial of the MedDiet in inflamm-aging.
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 | 0.084 | 0.159 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.004 |
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".