MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7153759381 · doi:10.5376/be.2025.15.0026

Review of Nutritional Components and Health Benefits of Sweet Potato

2025· article· W7153759381 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhen Li

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Evidence · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldNursing
TopicFood Science and Nutritional Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth benefitsQuality (philosophy)PopulationHuman health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sweet potatoes ( Ipomoea batatas ) have received increasing attention in recent years due to their high nutrition and the variety of active substances they contain. In this article, we have sorted out the main components of different parts of sweet potatoes, such as leaves and roots, and focused on introducing dietary fiber, beta-carotene, anthocyanins, vitamin C, minerals, etc., as well as the possible benefits they may bring to health. Nowadays, there are numerous in vitro experiments, animal experiments, and A small number of human studies, all of which show that eating sweet potatoes may have many benefits, such as improving vitamin A status, regulating blood sugar and lipid levels, antioxidation, anti-inflammation, protecting the cardiovascular system, anti-cancer, and even helping intestinal health. Generally speaking, sweet potatoes with orange flesh contain A lot of beta-carotene, which is helpful in preventing vitamin A deficiency. Purple sweet potatoes have a high content of anthocyanins and a stronger antioxidant effect. Sweet potato leaves themselves are also a good source of protein, minerals and polyphenols, and have high nutritional value. Although sweet potatoes have been regarded as a crop with high nutritional density and the ability to promote health, there are still not enough high-quality human clinical studies at present. The mutual influence among different genotypes, environmental conditions and processing methods also requires further research. In the future, cooperation among different disciplines should be strengthened to enable sweet potatoes to play a greater role in functional foods, nutritional intervention and breeding, and to promote more innovation.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.159 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological EvidenceSame topicFood Science and Nutritional StudiesFrench-language works237,207