Skip to the main content
Open WellbeingWhat the studies actually measured

Inflammation and oxidative stress

Cholineand Homocysteine

Only one source here so far, and it measured lower homocysteine.

How sure anyone can be

Low certainty, level 2 of 4

Further research is likely to change this.

The numbers reported

One source’s range, drawn against its own line of no difference and scaled to its own numbers.

-3.9-3-2.1

This range stays on one side of the no-difference line.

Bar the confidence interval — the range the true effect is likely to sit inNotch the number the source reportedLine where there would be no difference at all

One source, newest first

What we read is the published abstract, not the full paper, so a blank below may still be printed in the paper itself. A fixed rule worked this out from the source’s own fields. Nobody checked this rating by hand.

  • Randomised trial, 2005 · 26 participants

    Low certainty, level 2 of 4

    Choline supplemented as phosphatidylcholine decreases fasting and postmethionine-loading plasma homocysteine concentrations in healthy men.

    Am J Clin Nutr. 2005;82(1):111-7. doi:10.1093/ajcn.82.1.111. PMID:16002808.

    Number reported
    -3
    Which way it went
    Lower
    Likely range
    -3.9 to -2.1
    Source’s own words
    micromol/L fasting plasma total homocysteine, difference vs placebo
    Who was studied
    Adult men with mildly elevated homocysteine
    Compared with
    placebo oil mixture
    Amount taken
    2,600 mg/d choline as phosphatidylcholine
    For how long
    14 days
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 2 steps down: risk of bias and imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to Moderatethe abstract reports no risk-of-bias or quality appraisal, so study limitations cannot be ruled outNot in the abstract
    3. Imprecision brought it down to Low26 participants is below the 400-participant optimal information size floorReported in the abstract
    4. Ends at Low2 steps down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    indirectness
    Inconsistency
    One study, so there was nothing to disagree

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    AI review could not confirm it — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and at least one check failed. The batch record names the check and quotes the sentence that caused the doubt. No person read it.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

What is still missing from these readings

Every reading here records a range, a count of people, an amount and a length of time.

Something nobody wrote down is never a zero and never a guess.

Still to read for Choline

One of the six things on our list for Choline has no reading here yet:

  • Heart rate variability (SDNN)

Still to read means nobody here has got to it, not that it was tried and did nothing or that no research exists. A pairing on no list is not a gap: we never set out to read it.

Read next

This is a library, not advice. No recommendation, no dose, no diagnosis, no ranking. We never ask about your symptoms, and nothing here is tailored to you.