ArticleCurrent topics in nutraceutical research2018
Effect of Two Oat-based Cereals on Subjective Ratings of Appetite.
Article in Current topics in nutraceutical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Insights into the constellating drivers of satiety impacting dietary patterns and lifestyle.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Viscosity generated by oat β-glucan induces gastrointestinal mechanisms that influence appetite. Two oat-based ready-to-eat cereals (RTEC) with similar amounts of β-glucan but differing in their protein and sugar content were compared for their effects on appetite. Forty-seven healthy individuals, ≥18 years old, enrolled in a crossover trial consumed RTEC1 or RTEC2 in random order at least a week apart. Breakfasts contained 250kcals cereal and 105kcals fat-free milk. Subjective ratings of appetite were completed at baseline, and at 30, 60, 120, 180 and 240 minutes after consumption of the breakfast meals. Responses were analyzed as area under the curve (AUC) and per time-point. Significance was set at α=0.05. Fullness (p=0.01) and stomach fullness (p=0.02) were greater with RTEC 1 compared to RTEC 2 at 240 minutes. Stomach fullness (p=0.01) was greater at 30 minutes, and desire to eat (p=0.04) was reduced at 120 minutes with RTEC2 compared to RTEC1. There was no difference in the AUC for hunger, fullness, stomach fullness, desire to eat, or prospective intake. Ready-to-eat cereals containing similar amounts of oat β-glucan differed in the timing of significant differences in fullness or desire to eat, but appetite ratings over a four hour period did not differ.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30237755PMC6141034W2914903200What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.