Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26404365›Full record

Trial reportNutrients2015

Effect of 12 Weeks High Oleic Peanut Consumption on Cardio-Metabolic Risk Factors and Body Composition.

Jayne A Barbour, Peter R C Howe, Jonathan D Buckley, Janet Bryan, Alison M Coates

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nutrients, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jayne A BarbourAlliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity, University of South Australia, G.P.O. Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia 5001, Australia. Jon.buckley@unisa.edu.au.
Peter R C HoweClinical Nutrition Research Centre, University of Newcastle (PRCH), University Drive Callaghan, New South Wales 2308, Australia. Peter.howe@newcastle.edu.au.
Jonathan D BuckleyAlliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity, University of South Australia, G.P.O. Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia 5001, Australia. Jon.buckley@unisa.edu.au.
Janet BryanDepartment of Psychology, Social Work and Social Policy, University of South Australia, G.P.O. Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia 5001, Australia. Janet.bryan@unisa.edu.au.
Alison M CoatesAlliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity, University of South Australia, G.P.O. Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia 5001, Australia. Janet.bryan@unisa.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epidemiological evidence indicates an inverse association between nut consumption and obesity, inflammation, hyperlipidaemia and glucose intolerance. We investigated effects of high oleic peanut consumption vs. a nut free diet on adiposity and cardio-metabolic risk markers. In a randomised cross-over design, 61 healthy subjects (65 ± 7 years, body mass index (BMI) 31 ± 4 kg/m²) alternated either high oleic peanuts (15%-20% of energy) or a nut free diet for 12 weeks. Body composition and mass, waist circumference, C-reactive protein (CRP), lipids, glucose and insulin were assessed at baseline and after each phase. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) compared the two diets. Consistent with other nut studies, there were no differences in lipids, CRP, glucose and insulin with peanut consumption. In contrast, some reports have demonstrated benefits, likely due to differences in the study cohort. Energy intake was 10% higher (853 kJ, p < 0.05), following peanut consumption vs. control, attributed to a 30% increase in fat intake (p < 0.001), predominantly monounsaturated (increase 22 g, p < 0.05). Despite greater energy intake during the peanut phase, there were no differences in body composition, and less than predicted increase (0.5 kg) in body weight for this additional energy intake, possibly due to incomplete nutrient absorption and energy utilisation.

Indexed as

AdiposityArachisDietEnergy IntakeAgedBiomarkersBlood GlucoseC-Reactive ProteinCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansInsulinLipidsMaleMetabolic SyndromeMiddle AgedBiomarkersBlood GlucoseC-Reactive ProteinInsulinLipidsOleic Acidbody weightglucosehigh-oleic peanutsinflammationinsulinlipids

Identifiers

PMID26404365
PMCPMC4586538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.