Cereal Fibers and Satiety: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Intake of cereal fiber has been linked to favorable health outcomes, such as lower body weight. Changes in perceived appetite sensations are a possible mechanism. Evidence of varied effects of different cereal fibers on satiety is conflicting. OBJECTIVE: Considering satiety as a potential mechanism to reduce dietary intake, this study aimed to systematically review the effect of higher cereal fiber intake compared with a lower-fiber control on appetite sensations and ad libitum energy intake, using visual analog scales and subsequent meal intake data. DATA SOURCES: Literature pertaining to the effects of cereal fibers on satiety outcomes was gathered through Medline, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science. DATA EXTRACTION: Randomized crossover intervention studies in healthy humans assessing the effects of cereal fibers on subjective measures of appetite for a minimum of 2 hours, with ≥3-day washout periods, and that detailed the type and amount of fiber delivered for each intervention were eligible. Quality was assessed using the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Quality Criteria Checklist and Health Canada Consistency Tool. DATA ANALYSIS: Evidence from 48 studies indicated that cereal fiber intake was associated with favorable effects on satiety and other measures of appetite but limited effects on ad libitum energy intake. Higher cereal fiber intake from rye and oat sources showed superior effects on appetite compared with a lower-fiber control. Wheat and barley fibers as well as functional fibers, resistant starch, and soluble corn fiber, showed a weak effect on appetite sensations and ad libitum energy intake. CONCLUSION: Overall, a higher intake of cereal fiber compared with a low-fiber control indicates positive effects on satiety measures. Further research is required to assess the influence of physicochemical properties of different cereal fiber types as well as effects of age, gender, and disease state on expression of satiety signals. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42023395182.
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 | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".