MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Ready to eat cereal consumption with total and cause‐specific mortality: prospective analysis of 367,442 individuals (810.20)

2014· article· en· W1491292149 on OpenAlexaff
Lu Qi, Min Xu, Albert Lee, Susan Cho

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsNutrasource
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiseaseDiabetes mellitusProspective cohort studyCancerCause of deathRisk of mortalityInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background □ Intakes of ready to eat cereals (RTEC) have been inversely associated with the risk factors of chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes, and certain cancers; however their relations with total and cause‐specific mortality remain unclear. We prospectively assessed the associations of RTEC intakes with all causes and disease‐specific mortality risk. Methods and Results □ The study included 367,442 participants from the prospective NIH‐AARP Diet and Health Study. Intakes of RTEC were assessed at baseline. Over an average of 14 years of follow‐up, in total 46,067 deaths were documented. Consumption of RTEC was inversely associated with risk of mortality from all‐cause mortality and death from cancer, digestive cancer, CVD, and respiratory disease. In multivariable models, as compared with non‐consumers of RTEC, those in the highest intake of RTEC had a 15% lower risk of all‐cause mortality and 10‐30% lower risk of disease‐specific mortality such as deaths from CVD, diabetes, all cancers, and digestive caner (all P for trend < 0.05). Within RTEC consumers, total fiber intakes were associated with reduced risk of mortality from all‐cause mortality (15%) and deaths from CVD (12%), cancer (10%), digestive cancer (17%), and respiratory disease (10%). Conclusions □ Intakes of RTEC were inversely associated all‐cause mortality and disease‐specific mortality; Within RTEC consumers, higher intake of total fiber was associated with reduced risk of total and cause‐specific mortality.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicNutritional Studies and Diet→French-language works237,207→