MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantifying intestinal lipolysis with MRI and TD-NMR: Proof of concept using dairy cream digested in vitro

2024· article· en· W4405925463 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ruoxuan Deng, Guylaine Collewet, T. Lucas, Mireille Cambert, Stéphane Quellec, Jordane Ossemond, Françoise Nau, Steven Le Feunteun, Maja Musse

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Chemistry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsHorizon 2020Institute of Circulatory and Respiratory HealthCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsLipolysisIn vitroChemistryProof of conceptFood scienceChromatographyBiochemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding lipid digestion is crucial for promoting human health. Traditional methods for studying lipolysis face challenges in sample representativeness and pre-treatment, and cannot measure real-time lipolysis in vivo . Thus, non-invasive techniques like magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) need to be developed. This study assessed the MRI water-fat separation method for monitoring in vitro intestinal digestion of dairy cream , supported by high-performance thin-layer chromatography (HP-TLC) and time-domain nuclear magnetic resonance (TD-NMR). A clear distinction was found between the T 2 of undigested lipids (∼120 ms) and lipolytic products (0.1–15 ms). The short T 2 of lipolytic products likely results from semi-crystalline structures formed with bile salts. While MRI methods cannot detect such fast-relaxing protons, it effectively quantified lipolysis by tracking the residual undigested lipids, showing high correlation with HP-TLC results (R 2 = 0.93 and 0.95 for 13-s and 6-min MRI methods, respectively). The rapid 13-s MRI method offers strong potential for future in vivo applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood ChemistrySame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207