A case–control study of breast cancer and dietary intake of individual fatty acids and antioxidants in Montreal, Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case-control study was conducted among French-Canadians to assess the association between breast cancer risk and specific fatty acids, and to investigate if breast cancer risk associated with individual polyunsaturated fatty acids differs in regard to antioxidant intakes. A total of 414 cases and 429 population-based controls were interviewed between 1989 and 1993. Dietary intake was assessed by a food-frequency questionnaire. No overall association was found between specific fatty acids and breast cancer risk, after adjustment for risk factors and total energy intake. In postmenopausal women with low vitamin E intake, there was an inverse and dose-dependent relationship between arachidonic acid and breast cancer risk [odds ratio (OR)=0.41; 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.20-0.82); P=0.02], while those with high vitamin E intake exhibited a significantly elevated risk [OR=2.46; 95% CI (1.12-5.39); P=0.024] when comparing the upper to the lower quartiles. The possible role of the interaction effect between arachidonic acid and vitamin E in breast cancer risk requires further investigation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it