A comparison of food group variety between toddlers with and without cystic fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the food group variety and nutritional adequacy of the diet between toddlers with cystic fibrosis (CF) and age-matched controls. Subjects A clinical sample of 22 toddlers with CF (mean age=21.3 +/- 7.2 months) matched to a community sample of 22 healthy peers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The variety index for toddlers (VIT) and the mean adequacy ratio (MAR). RESULTS: Fruit group scores were highest for children with CF (0.95 +/- 0.13; possible range 0.00-1.00), and dairy group scores were highest for controls (0.90 +/- 0.18). All children earned the lowest scores for vegetables (CF: 0.15 +/- 0.12; controls: 0.26 +/- 0.22). No significant differences were found when comparing VIT and MAR scores by sample (P >0.05). A moderate positive relationship was found between total VIT scores and MAR scores for all children (r=0.38, P <0.05). Toddlers with CF did not achieve the 120-150% of Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for energy. CONCLUSIONS: Toddlers with CF are consuming diets that are varied and nutritionally adequate for a healthy child. To optimize nutritional status and growth, current recommendations for toddlers with CF to eat a well-balanced diet and to exceed daily RDA for energy requirements remain key dietary issues.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".