MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020159023 · doi:10.1186/1471-2474-11-20

Dietary patterns in Canadian men and women ages 25 and older: relationship to demographics, body mass index, and bone mineral density

2010· article· en· W2020159023 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lisa Langsetmo, Suzette Poliquin, David A. Hanley, Jerilynn C. Prior, Susan I. Barr, Tassos Anastassiades, Tanveer Towheed, David Goltzman, Nancy Kreiger

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsCancer Care OntarioQueen's UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British ColumbiaPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEli Lilly CanadaSanofiEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsDemographicsMedicineBody mass indexBone mineralSports medicineGerontologyEpidemiologyDemographyBone densityYoung adultEnvironmental healthOsteoporosisInternal medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous research has shown that underlying dietary patterns are related to the risk of many different adverse health outcomes, but the relationship of these underlying patterns to skeletal fragility is not well understood. The objective of the study was to determine whether dietary patterns in men (ages 25-49, 50+) and women (pre-menopause, post-menopause) are related to femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) independently of other lifestyle variables, and whether this relationship is mediated by body mass index. METHODS: We performed an analysis of 1928 men and 4611 women participants in the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study, a randomly selected population-based longitudinal cohort. We determined dietary patterns based on the self-administered food frequency questionnaires in year 2 of the study (1997-99). Our primary outcome was BMD as measured by dual x-ray absorptiometry in year 5 of the study (2000-02). RESULTS: We identified two underlying dietary patterns using factor analysis and then derived factor scores. The first factor (nutrient dense) was most strongly associated with intake of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. The second factor (energy dense) was most strongly associated with intake of soft drinks, potato chips and French fries, certain meats (hamburger, hot dog, lunch meat, bacon, and sausage), and certain desserts (doughnuts, chocolate, ice cream). The energy dense factor was associated with higher body mass index independent of other demographic and lifestyle factors, and body mass index was a strong independent predictor of BMD. Surprisingly, we did not find a similar positive association between diet and BMD. In fact, when adjusted for body mass index, each standard deviation increase in the energy dense score was associated with a BMD decrease of 0.009 (95% CI: 0.002, 0.016) g/cm(2) for men 50+ years old and 0.004 (95% CI: 0.000, 0.008) g/cm(2) for postmenopausal women. In contrast, for men 25-49 years old, each standard deviation increase in the nutrient dense score, adjusted for body mass index, was associated with a BMD increase of 0.012 (95% CI: 0.002, 0.022) g/cm(2). CONCLUSIONS: In summary, we found no consistent relationship between diet and BMD despite finding a positive association between a diet high in energy dense foods and higher body mass index and a strong correlation between body mass index and BMD. Our data suggest that some factor related to the energy dense dietary pattern may partially offset the advantages of higher body mass index with regard to bone health.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.248
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations82
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207