MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969433332 · doi:10.1086/379197

Dietary Intake and Risk of Persistent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Infection: The Ludwig‐McGill HPV Natural History Study

2003· article· en· W1969433332 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anna R. Giuliano, Erin M. Siegel, Denise J. Roe, Silvandeiede Ferreira, Maria Luiza Baggio, Lenice Galan, Eliane Duarte‐Franco, Luisa L. Villa, Thomas E. Rohan, James R. Marshall, Eduardo L. Franco

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council Canada
KeywordsMedicineQuartileNatural historyHPV infectionPhysiologyHuman papillomavirusInternal medicineGynecologyObstetricsCancerCervical cancerConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The association between dietary intake and persistence of type-specific human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, during a 12-month period, among 433 women participating in the Ludwig-McGill HPV Natural History Study was evaluated by use of a nested case-control design. Dietary intake was assessed by a food-frequency questionnaire at the month-4 visit. HPV status was assessed at months 0, 4, 8, and 12 by polymerase chain reaction (MY09/11). Only women who ever tested positive for HPV were included in the present study: 248 had transient HPV infections (1 of 4 positive tests or nonconsecutively positive), and 185 had persistent HPV infections (> or =2 consecutive tests positive for the same HPV type). Risk of type-specific, persistent HPV infection was lower among women reporting intake values of beta-cryptoxanthin and lutein/zeaxanthin in the upper 2 quartiles and intake values of vitamin C in the upper quartile, compared with those reporting intake in the lowest quartile. Consumption of papaya > or =1 time/week was inversely associated with persistent HPV infection.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations122
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207