MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018826675 · doi:10.3148/69.4.2008.192

<i>Nutrition Education Program Design</i>For Youth with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

2008· article· en· W2018826675 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jennifer Buccino, Denis Daneman, Jill Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNutrition EducationType 1 diabetesMedicinePsychological interventionType 2 Diabetes MellitusObesityChildhood obesityGerontologyFamily medicineDiabetes mellitusPediatricsPhysical therapyNursingOverweightEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increased prevalence of childhood obesity has led to rising rates of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in youth. Recommended nutrition strategies for children with T2DM are not well delineated. Adult recommendations for T2DM do not take into account different stages of physical and psychological growth. Nutrition recommendations for children with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) also are not applicable to youth with T2DM, who generally require interventions to promote weight loss. A nutrition education program was developed for youth with T2DM, with attention to current nutrition recommendations and the delivery of nutrition education to obese children, children with T1DM, adults with T2DM, and children with T2DM. Together with program development strategies, a summary of relevant content and mode of delivery is presented for a nutrition education program intended specifically for youth with T2DM at The Hospital for Sick Children.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and ResearchSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207