Abstracts from Dietetic Research Event – June 14-15, 2012
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Welcome to Toronto! On behalf of the Canadian Foundation for Dietetic Research, it is my great pleasure to welcome you to the 2012 Dietitians of Canada Annual Conference Research Event. This preeminent event represents the breadth and depth of dietetic research in Canada. This year we had a record-breaking number of almost 100 abstract submissions! This exemplifies the strong and significant role dietitians are playing in the research community to support all areas of dietetic practice. To date, we already have over 950 delegates attending the conference with 36 oral presentations and over 50 research posters. The abstracts cover topics including clinical nutrition, communitybased nutritional care, nutrition needs of vulnerable groups, wellness and public health, dietetic practice and education, and food safety and policy. The broad spectrum of topics is one of the exciting aspects of our profession. This will surely be a great opportunity to reacquaint yourself with old friends and to meet new colleagues through your common research interests and practice. I wish to acknowledge and congratulate all the presenters and co-authors for all their hard work and for sharing their research. New to this year’s event will be the electronic poster sessions, which is based on the popular Poster Tours from previous years. Each presenter will speak about the highlights of his/her research while the presenter’s poster is projected on to a large LCD screen. On behalf of the membership of Dietitians of Canada, I would like to thank the Abstracts Review Committee members who took time out of their busy schedules to volunteer their expertise in reviewing the abstracts. Our Abstracts Review Committee represented a broad spectrum of dietetic expertise and professional practice. I wish to thank them for their tremendous effort and contribution. Thank you to: Beth Armour from PEN of Dietitians of Canada, Dr. Pauline Darling from St. Michael’s Hospital and the University of Toronto, Dr. Alison Duncan from the University of Guelph, Mahsa Jessri from the University of Alberta, Christine Mehling from EatRight Ontario, and Dawna Royall from the Canadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research. I would also like to acknowledge the following individuals who will assist with moderating the oral and poster sessions in conjunction with the Committee members. Thank you to: Barb Anderson, Isla Horvath, Jane Thirsk, and Pat Vanderkooy. A special thank you also goes to Isla Horvath from the Canadian Foundation for Dietetic Research and Diana Sheh from Dietitians of Canada in supporting the Committee in the abstracts review process. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the Canadian Foundation for Dietetic Research and Dietitians of Canada for their ongoing support of research in dietetics and nutrition in Canada and for their mission to foster and support new researchers and dietetic interns in this important area of practice. Please join me in celebrating this exciting event and the research of your fellow colleagues.
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 | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,691 | 0,457 |
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; l’étiquette directe de Gemma et le classifieur distillé Codex s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».