A comparison of eating habits between retired or semi-retired aged subjects and younger subjects in full-time work
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract An analysis of eating habits in older retired subjects (“No Work group”) and younger subjects employed in full-time work (“Work group”) has been carried out. It used a questionnaire that assessed why individuals chose to eat or not to eat meals during the course of the day, and subjective responses to the meals. The questionnaire was answered every three hours over a “typical week” which, for the Work group, entailed working during the weekdays and resting at the weekend. For the “No Work” group, breakfast was the most frequently taken meal of the day whereas, for the “Work” group, this meal was often missed. Patterns of meal intake were not significantly different between the weekdays and weekend for the “No Work” group, but the “Work” group ate more hot food at the weekend. The reasons cited for eating/not eating a meal and for choosing the type of meal eaten were dominated by hunger/lack of hunger in both groups. In addition, whereas habits were also important for the “No Work” group, it was time availability or the lack of it that was of major importance to the Work group, though this was significantly less important at the weekend. Meals which required more time for preparation and cooking were appreciated significantly more (appetite before the meal, enjoyment during it, and satiety afterwards) than meals such as snacks and cold food, which could be prepared more quickly. Some implications of these results, with regard to regular meals acting as a social zeitgeber in older subjects and the additional constraints imposed upon night workers, are considered. Keywords: food intaketime constraintsappetite Acknowledgement We thank Professor D. Goldspink for allowing us to approach the subjects who comprised the No Work group.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle