Sodium food sources in the Canadian diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to provide information on the current sources of dietary sodium in the Canadian food supply to provide a baseline to measure against the effectiveness of strategies to reduce salt consumption. Such strategies are being developed by a Health Canada-led multistakeholder Working Group. Data from the 2004 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) 2.2, Nutrition, were used to determine the leading food group contributors of sodium in the diet. The total sample size was more than 35,000 respondents. The results from this study were reported for 4 age and sex groups, namely, youths aged 1 to 8 years, youths aged 9 to 18 years, males aged 19 years and older, and females aged 19 years and older. Average daily intakes of sodium for these groups were 2388 mg, 3412 mg, 3587 mg, and 2684 mg, respectively. In all cases these intakes exceeded the tolerable upper intake level (UL) established by the Institute of Medicine, as well as targets set by the governments of the United Kingdom and the United States and the World Health Organization. The contribution of sodium to the food supply by the top 40 food groups is presented for each of the age and sex groups. The key food group contributors of sodium are breads (13.88%), processed meats (8.90%), and pasta dishes (5.67%). Although breads are found to be major contributors of sodium, this is mainly because of the large consumption, rather than a high concentration of sodium. Higher-sodium foods, such as processed meats, are eaten in smaller quantities but, because of their sodium density, contribute significant amounts of sodium to the diet of Canadians. Some very high sodium foods, such as frozen dinners, are eaten by only a small proportion of the population, but for those consuming these, the sodium could contribute a significant proportion of the UL just from a single meal.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".