MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015402538 · doi:10.3148/66.4.2005.237

<i>Nutrient Inadequacy</i>in Obese and Non-Obese Youth

2005· article· en· W2015402538 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Linda Gillis, Aubrey Gillis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicMagnesium in Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health Sciences
FundersHamilton Health Sciences
KeywordsMicronutrientMedicinePercentileBody mass indexObesityVitamin D and neurologyVitaminEnvironmental healthNutrientDietary Reference IntakeEndocrinologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: In this study, the Dietary Reference Intake standards were used to evaluate the prevalence of inadequate intakes of micronutrients in obese and non-obese youth. METHODS: Dietary intake was analyzed with a dietary history taken by a registered dietitian. The obese group (n=156) had a body mass index (BMI) above the 95th percentile for age and sex. The non-obese group (n=90) was between the tenth and 85th BMI percentiles. RESULTS: In the obese subjects, the prevalence of inadequate intakes was 81% for vitamin E and 27% for magnesium; the proportions with intakes below the Adequate Intakes (AIs) for calcium and vitamin D were 55% and 46%, respectively. The obese children consumed 124% of estimated need for energy, 32% of which came from fat. The non-obese had a similar prevalence of inadequate intakes (vitamin E, 93%; magnesium, 29%; calcium, 51%; vitamin D, 44%). They consumed 107% of estimated need for energy, and 31% of energy came from fat. For both groups, all other nutrient intakes were adequate. CONCLUSIONS: Even though children may consume an excess of energy, they may not be meeting all of their micronutrient needs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations45
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and ResearchSame topicMagnesium in Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207