MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133091859

Assessing the Effect of Tree Nut and Peanut Consumption on Adiposity: Is a Calorie a Calorie?

2020· dissertation· W7133091859 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2020
Typedissertation
Language
FieldNursing
TopicNuts composition and effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersObesity CanadaInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and DiabetesBanting and Best Diabetes Centre, University of TorontoCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDiabetes CanadaGovernment of CanadaAlmond Board of CaliforniaUniversity of TorontoNovo Nordisk
KeywordsNutCalorieRandomized controlled trialCrossover studyProspective cohort studyWeight gainCohortWaistDiabetes mellitus
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nuts have been shown to have diabetes and cardiovascular related health benefits, yet there remains concern that nuts may contribute to weight gain due to their high energy density. To address this concern, the research carried out in this thesis includes a systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) of prospective cohorts and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the role of nuts on measures of adiposity, and an exploratory analysis of a randomized crossover trial to assess the bioaccessibility of energy and macronutrients of almonds. The SRMA identified 7 prospective cohort studies and 86 RCTs involving 569,910 and 12,092 participants, respectively. Nut consumption was inversely associated with the primary outcome overweight/obesity, as well secondary outcomes (body weight, risk of ≥5 kg weight gain, waist circumference) in prospective cohort studies. Similarly, there was no adverse effect of nuts on the primary outcome of body weight or any of the secondary outcomes (BMI, body fat, waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio or visceral adipose tissue) in RCTs. The 3-phase randomized crossover trial including 22 participants with hyperlipidemia indicated fat from almonds was only 78.5±3.1% bioaccessible with an average overall energy loss of 21.2±3.1% (40.6 kcal/d). When considering the diet as a whole, there was significantly less bioaccessibility of energy and fat with almond consumption, but not carbohydrate or protein, compared to the control. Inclusion of ~73 g of almonds each day decreased the energy bioaccessibility of the diet by approximately 2%. Thus, the energy content of almonds may not be as bioaccessible as predicted by Atwater factors. Current evidence demonstrates that nuts are not associated with increased overweight/obesity incidence or weight gain, possibly due to the reduced bioaccessibility of energy and fat content of nuts. The research conducted in this thesis suggest nuts may be recommended without the concern that they contribute to weight gain.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.348 · 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