Dietary Adequacies among South African Adults in Rural KwaZulu-Natal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Food quality, determined by micronutrient content, is a stronger determinant of nutritional status than food quantity. Health concerns resulting from the co-existence of over-nutrition and under-nutrition in low income populations in South Africa have been fully recognized in the last two decades. This study aimed to further investigate dietary adequacy amongst adults in rural KwaZulu-Natal, by determining daily energy and nutrient intakes, and identifying the degree of satisfaction of dietary requirements. METHODS: Cross-sectional study assessing dietary adequacy from 24-hour dietary recalls of randomly selected 136 adults in Empangeni, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. RESULTS: Results are presented for men (n = 52) and women (n = 84) 19-50 and >50 years old. Mean energy intake was greatest in women >50 years (2852 kcal/day) and exceeded Dietary Reference Intake's for both men and women, regardless of age. Mean daily energy intake from carbohydrates was 69% for men and 67% for women, above the Dietary Reference Intake range of 45-65%. Sodium was also consumed in excess, and the Dietary Reference Intakes of vitamins A, B12, C, D, and E, calcium, zinc and pantothenic acid were not met by the majority of the population. CONCLUSION: Despite mandatory fortification of staple South African foods, micronutrient inadequacies are evident among adults in rural South African communities. Given the excess caloric intake and the rising prevalence of obesity and other non-communicable diseases in South Africa, a focus on diet quality may be a more effective approach to influence micronutrient status than a focus on diet quantity.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".