MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417220938 · doi:10.1002/fsn3.71324

Effects and Mechanisms of Dietary Natural Products on Ischemic Stroke: An Updated Review

2025· review· en· W4417220938 on OpenAlexaff
Kai Zhong, Yong Zhang, Naidong Wang, Guangwen Li, Xianjun Zhang, Zhijun Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Science & Nutrition · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong Province
KeywordsNeuroprotectionBioavailabilityStroke (engine)Mechanism (biology)Health benefitsIschemic strokeNatural (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ischemic stroke ranks among the primary contributors to mortality and prolonged disability globally, representing a significant public health challenge. Some clinical drugs for the treatment of ischemic stroke have significant side effects. Therefore, exploring effective therapeutic strategies is crucial. Some dietary natural products, such as fruits, vegetables, teas, herbs, nuts, probiotics and prebiotics, exert potential neuroprotective effects on ischemic stroke. The underlying mechanisms of action include suppressing oxidative stress, inhibiting inflammation, alleviating excitotoxicity, promoting angiogenesis, protecting blood-brain barrier, regulating gut microbiota, attenuating apoptosis, inhibiting autophagy, suppressing platelet aggregation and thrombosis, and improving mitochondrial function. This review mainly summarizes recent advancements in the potential therapeutic effects and mechanisms of dietary natural products on ischemic stroke. Additionally, it highlights future research directions, including the synergistic effects of combining dietary natural products, as well as the incorporation of nanotechnology to enhance bioavailability and targeted delivery. Overall, this review provides a useful reference for the application of dietary natural products in the prevention and management of ischemic stroke.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood Science & NutritionSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207