MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1684986887 · doi:10.1002/jsfa.6730

Rice fortification with zinc during parboiling may improve the adequacy of zinc intakes in Bangladesh

2014· article· en· W1684986887 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Hotz, Khandaker A Kabir, Sharifa S. Dipti, Joanne E Arsenault, Moniruzzaman Bipul

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Science of Food and Agriculture · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicTrace Elements in Health
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain Institute
FundersUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsZincParboilingFortificationMicronutrientBiofortificationFood scienceChemistryAnimal scienceZinc deficiency (plant disorder)PopulationMedicineBiologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Zinc deficiency is prevalent among children and women in Bangladesh and parboiled rice is the major staple food consumed. Parboiling offers an opportunity to increase the zinc and iron content of rice by adding fortificants to the soaking water. RESULTS: Rice zinc content increased with increasing amounts of zinc sulfate added to the parboil soaking water. Addition of 1300 mg zinc L(-1) increased raw polished rice zinc content from 16.6 to 44.9 mg kg(-1) and from 12.6 to 32.9 mg kg(-1) in the open and closed parboiling systems, equivalent to 170% and 161% increases, respectively. Retention of zinc after washing and cooking was 70-81% across all concentrations tested. Addition of iron-ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid and zinc sulfate together increased zinc, but not iron, content of polished rice. The simulated prevalence of inadequate zinc intake was reduced by more than half among children and nearly two-thirds among women if 50% of the population were to consume the 1300 mg zinc L(-1) parboiled fortified rice. CONCLUSION: Addition of zinc sulfate to soaking water during parboiling increases the zinc content of rice and, if found to be bioavailable, could substantially reduce the prevalence of inadequate zinc intake by children and women in Bangladesh.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations26
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Science of Food and AgricultureSame topicTrace Elements in HealthFrench-language works237,207