Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Chronic diseases are leading causes of death and disability in Canada and worldwide, and many of these diseases arc associated with preventable risk factors. (1) For example, a recent analysis found that a significant proportion of cancers - at least a quarter, and up to 40 per cent or more for some types - could be prevented through changes in diet and physical activity. (2) Taking more effective preventive action is clearly an urgent public health priority. The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for global action to stave off the impending disaster of increased mortality and disability from these diseases. (3) Even once we recognize the importance of preventive action, however, it can be difficult to know what steps to take. There are many different options and competing priorities. We want to implement measures that will be effective, but effectiveness can be difficult to predict. It is not always feasible to study public health interventions in the same way as other health interventions like new drugs, so looking for the same type or level of evidence can be problematic. (4) These challenges are exacerbated in the case of chronic disease prevention. (5) Chronic disease is often the result of a complex matrix of factors, interacting in ways that are sometimes unpredictable. (6) If we insist on waiting for solid evidence that a preventive measure will be effective, this could mean deferring action indefinitely. Given the serious public health problems we face, such delays are not acceptable. We should not abandon our efforts to search for useful evidence, but should act on the best evidence that is currently available, while committing to monitor and adapt measures as needed. (7) In choosing strategies, we can also consider factors such as the proportion of expected costs and benefits, feasibility, and whether measures have a plausible basis according to everyday experience and accepted theories of human behaviour. (8) Food labelling The regulation of food labelling is one part of a public health strategy to promote healthy eating. Improving consumers' access to accurate and reliable information about their food can enable healthier choices. This approach focuses on empowering consumers with information, rather than trying lo dictate choices in a paternalistic way. However, consumers need to be able to trust information in order to act on it, and many consumers are sceptical of the claims on food labels. (9) The government has a crucial role to play in ensuring that nutrition information is reliable and adequately accessible. Many jurisdictions around the world, including Canada's most important trading partners, are actively engaged in reforming their food labelling legislation. They are moving to expand mandatory nutrition labelling to restaurants and to regulate front-of-package food labelling more effectively. Menu labelling Restaurant foods are not currently required to carry nutrition information (unless a nutrient content claim is made, in which case the supporting information must be displayed). (10) Legislation to require some nutrition information to be displayed in chain restaurants has been passed by a number of city, county, and state governments in the United States, and some of these laws have already been implemented. (11) The new United States federal health reform legislation includes provisions mandating nutrition disclosure in restaurants with more than twenty outlets nationwide, (12) and the Food and Drug Administration recently released the regulations that will put this requirement into effect. (13) most of the U.S. laws require calorie amounts to be posted on menus or menu boards, with other nutrition information available in each outlet as a poster or brochure. Surveys have consistently found high levels of public support for menu labelling. (14) Studies show that without disclosure, people find it very difficult to estimate the nutritional content of restaurant food. …
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,039 | 0,011 |
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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».