Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 259

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Absorption capacity of fructose in healthy adults. Comparison with sucrose and its constituent monosaccharides.

Open access
Rumessen, J J, Gudmand-Høyer, E·1986·Gut
DOI 10.1136/gut.27.10.1161
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The capacity to absorb fructose in 10 healthy adults was investigated by means of hydrogen breath analysis. Fructose absorption was quantified with lactulose standards. Significant hydrogen production (greater than or equal to 20 ppm rise of breath hydrogen) was found after challenge with 10% solutions of 50, 37.5, 25, 20, and 15 g fructose in eight, seven, five, four and one subjects, respectively. One subject showed malabsorption after a 10 g dose and possibly also 5 g fructose. In contrast, no malabsorption could be detected in any of the 10 subjects after ingestion of 100 g, 75 g, or 50 g sucrose or a mixture of 50 g glucose and 50 g fructose. After ingestion of mixtures of 50 g fructose +25 g glucose and 50 g fructose +12.5 g glucose malabsorption was present in three and seven subjects, respectively. Symptoms during all challenges were mild, or absent. It is concluded that in the healthy state the absorption capacity of fructose given alone ranges from less than 5 g to more than 50 g. The absorption capacity of fructose given as sucrose is much higher. Glucose stimulates fructose uptake in a dose dependent fashion. The possible existence of more than one intestinal transport system for fructose is considered. The elucidation of the clinical relevance of the findings is important.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/gut.27.10.1161

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Rumessen, J. J., & Gudmand-Høyer, E.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1986-10
Volume
27
Issue
10
Pages
1161-1168
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
DOI
10.1136/gut.27.10.1161
OpenAlex
W2170347119
Cited by
259
References
0
FWCI
4.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.