Dietary assessment of hemodialysis patients in <scp>T</scp>ehran, <scp>I</scp>ran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inadequate dietary intakes are a major determinant of malnutrition in hemodialysis (HD) patients. Considering the lack of information available on dietary intakes of HD patients in Iran, the present study was designed to assess the dietary intakes of HD patients in Tehran, Iran. For this cross-sectional study, from among adult HD patients of 50 Tehran hemodialysis centers, 291 patients were randomly selected. Dietary intakes of these patients were assessed using a 4-day dietary recall. In addition, 4 mL of blood was obtained from each patient before dialysis to measure serum urea, creatinine, albumin, phosphorus, calcium, potassium, and high sensitive C-reactive protein levels. Dietary intakes of energy, protein and fiber were lower than recommended intakes in 88%, 84.5%, and 99% of HD patients, respectively. There were significant associations between dietary energy intake with the patient's age (p < 0.05), and HD vintage (P < 0.001). In addition, a significant association was found between dietary protein intake and sex (P < 0.05). Intakes of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B6, B12, C, E, folic acid, and of the minerals calcium and zinc (from both the diet and supplements) were lower than recommended intakes in 13.5%, 41.5%, 19%, 66%, 61%, 78%, 77%, 24%, 34%, and 98.5% of HD patients, respectively. Inadequate intakes of energy and various nutrients are prevalent in HD patients in Tehran, Iran, which may contribute to increased morbidity and mortality in these patients. Therefore, nutrition counseling and the administration of vitamin and mineral supplements are necessary in Iranian HD patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".