MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416793699 · doi:10.1155/ijfo/7084868

Sorghum and Sorghum‐Based Products: Nutritional Composition, Prebiotic Potential and Health Benefits in Gut Microbiota Interactions

2025· article· en· W4416793699 on OpenAlexaff
Warnakulasuriya Mary Ann Dipika Binosha Fernando, Abdulraheem R. Adisa, Kalmee Pramoda Kariyawasam, Haththotuwa Gamage Amal Sudaraka Samarasinghe, H.D. Barnes, Dona Pamoda W. Jayatunga, B. G. D. Nissanka Kolitha De Silva, Vijay Jayasena

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrebioticSorghumHealth benefitsMicronutrientCropFunctional foodGut floraSweet sorghum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

family and is the fifth most important crop globally. Sorghum grains (SGs) are rich in health-promoting macro- and micronutrients and phytochemicals. SGs are commonly consumed as food or as ingredients in food, especially in African countries. Therefore, food products such as ogi, bread and flour have been and are still being developed from SGs to provide nutritional and health benefits. However, the nutritional and prebiotic potential of SGs, especially the pigment pericarps, has not been fully exploited. This review describes micronutrients in different varieties of sorghum and the health benefits of sorghum consumption, especially its interaction with the human gut microbiota. It further provides a comprehensive update on the properties and health benefits of improved sorghum-based food products. Finally, the influence of processing methods on SGs is summarised.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food ScienceSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207