MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6962628309 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/h7ykw

Collaborative Study to validate a well-established static in vitro method (pH stat and pH drop) for determining protein digestibility

2023· other· en· W6962628309 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtein qualityProtein digestibilityQuality (philosophy)CertificationFood and drug administrationIn vitroIn vivo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Protein Committee of the Institute for the Advancement of Food and Nutrition Sciences (IAFNS) [https://iafns.org/] is sponsoring a Collaborative Study to validate a well-established static in vitro method (pH stat and pH drop) for determining protein digestibility. The objective is to provide the science base that would support regulatory approval for this in vitro method to calculate the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS), a measure of protein quality, which currently requires the use of animals for determining protein digestibility in order to make protein nutrient content claims. Dr. James House, Professor, University of Manitoba, has been contracted by IAFNS to lead the Central Laboratory for the Collaborative Study. Background. The reliance the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and Health Canada on in vivo rodent bioassays to measure protein digestibility for PDCAAS or PER for quality represents a major barrier for innovation in the development of high-quality protein foods at a time when there is strong public opposition to the use of animals for research on consumer products. Suppliers of protein ingredients are challenged to concurrently provide evidence of protein quality to support protein content claims AND evidence that products haven’t been tested on animals, while suppliers to those seeking Vegan Certification cannot meet current requirements for protein quality assessment. As a result, suppliers of novel protein ingredients in North America often choose to not measure protein quality using the approved in vivo method. Although research to develop improved measures of protein quality (e.g. in vitro DIAAS) are ongoing, results are years away from implementation. In the meantime, the proposed in vitro protein digestibility method commonly used in research labs provides an immediate, scientifically, and ethically sound approach to encourage more food manufacturers to measure and maintain protein quality in foods being developed with plant and alternative protein sources in North American. How will the Collaborative Project Goal be Achieved? A minimum of 8 participating laboratories, as required to be validated by AOCS for approval as an Official Method, will be provided a set of food protein samples whose digestibility has already been established in order to show equivalency with the in vitro method. Results will be evaluated by AOCS to determine whether the interlaboratory performance of the method meet the criteria for approval as an Official Method. Results will be published in an appropriate peer-reviewed journal. The final AOCS approved method and data will be shared with the FDA and Health Canada for consideration as methods that can be used for calculating PDCAAS for use in protein content claims. Participating Laboratory’s Eligibility and Commitment. Laboratories interested in participating in the Collaborative Study should provide evidence of a) experience with the pH stat or pH drop method and b) capacity to execute the required analyses. Participating laboratories will be selected and contracted by the Coordinating Laboratory. Final versions of the method protocol will be reviewed by the Uniform Methods Committee of AOCS to ensure that the method descriptions meet the accrediting body requirements prior to conducting the Collaborative Study. The final protocol and 10-12 study samples will be provided to the participating labs. After completion of the Collaborative Study, statistical analyses will be conducted according to the recommendations of the accrediting organization.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.100

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.284 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207