Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dietetics is a discipline which depends wholly on a robust evidence base to shape clinical practice, and there is the expectation that the 21st century dietitian not only has a thorough understanding of the scientific principles that underpin how they work, but also a strong grounding in how those principles are determined through robust research methodology, analysis, ethical approaches and application of critical skills. The modern dietetics training curriculum fully recognises this requirement and, all over the world, the dietetic profession is becoming more empowered to shape clinical decision-making through critical applications of research. Increasingly, dietitians are expanding on their clinical practice through active involvement in research and increasingly through research leadership. This increases the standing of the profession, refines therapeutic approaches and develops the knowledge connections with medicine and other health professions allied to medicine. The Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics has been very pleased to publish the abstracts from the annual BDA Research Symposium for a number of years, as this event demonstrates in microcosm the broad diversity of research in the field, and showcases activity at all levels ranging from the undergraduate project researcher to doctoral level, and from research newcomer through to established research leaders. We hope to see participants in the event go on to publish their best findings in the Journal. The themes for the Research Symposium in 2018 are well-aligned with the overall themes of Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics issues across the year. In 2018, we published 79 articles, which were broadly in the themes of clinical nutrition, dietetic and professional practice, diabetes and the metabolic syndrome, public health nutrition, nutrition support, nutritional monitoring, weight management, pregnancy and paediatrics. Our clinical nutrition portfolio has included a strong series of papers on renal nutrition, ranging from qualitative evaluations of how renal nutrition guidelines can be integrated into normal family life 1, to data providing evidence that female patients are at greater risk of sarcopenia in haemodialysis than males 2. For nutritional support and monitoring, we have published papers on the use of blended diets for gastronomy fed children 3 and the successful use of novel smartphone applications for following up patients following bariatric surgery 4. Highlights in our paediatric portfolio for this year have included the demonstration of ethnic differences in infant feeding styles, which may associate with weight gain and future feeding behaviours 5; a reflection on the challenges of weaning infants with phenylketonuria, where phenylalanine-free protein substitutes play an important role 6; and an evaluation of appropriate nutritional risk scoring tools for use with children with acute burn injuries 7. The international nature of dietetic research is not captured by the BDA Symposium presented in this issue of the Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, but as Editor I am proud to report that over the last year we have published work from dietitians and nutrition researchers from the UK, Australia, Canada, China, Finland, India, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain and the United States of America. With an ever-increasing international reach, the Journal has the capacity to inform and influence the training 8, 9, practice 10-13 and therapeutic guidelines 14, 15 followed by dietitians and clinicians all over the world.
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 | 0,068 | 0,072 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,010 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,010 |
| Communication savante | 0,031 | 0,022 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,025 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,011 | 0,021 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,028 | 0,012 |
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 ».