Distinct Effects of Wheat and Black Bean Consumption on Postprandial Vascular Responses in People with Arterial Stiffness: A Pilot Randomized Cross-Over Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objective: Postprandial vascular responses impact vascular health. This study investigated whether eating pulses or whole grains can acutely relax blood vessels in people with arterial stiffness. Methods: A single-blinded, controlled randomized cross-over clinical trial was conducted to compare the effects of pulses (¾ cup black beans) versus whole grains (¾ cup whole wheat kernels, also known as wheat berries) versus white rice (¾ cup) on postprandial vascular responses in males and females with established arterial stiffness (n = 9, 3M/6F, 50–64 years old). Peripheral and central hemodynamic measurements were obtained non-invasively prior to and 2 h after food consumption and were compared by t-test within a food type. Results: Peripheral and central systolic blood pressure was increased (4%) after eating white rice but not after the consumption of wheat or beans. A marked decline in augmentation index at 75 bpm (arterial stiffness) from 26.1 ± 3.6% to 16.2 ± 2.0% was observed 2 h after eating whole wheat but not beans or white rice. All foods slightly decreased heart rate at 2 h but had limited effects on other parameters of circulatory or heart health. Conclusions: Eating whole wheat or beans acutely improved overall vascular and heart health when compared to white rice. The effects of wheat and beans were distinct, with whole wheat having a major positive effect on blood vessel stiffness. The findings suggest that regular inclusion of both whole wheat and beans in the diet would be beneficial for improving cardiovascular health in persons exhibiting signs of arterial dysfunction, thus providing a potential therapeutic benefit for individuals who are at risk of heart attack and stroke. The study was registered (NCT05818358) on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".