Intake of Nutritional Supplements among People Exercising in Gyms in Beirut City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of nutritional supplements among exercisers in gyms has been never investigated in the Middle East. The aim of the current study was to assess the prevalence intake of nutritional supplements and the potential influencing factors among people exercising in gyms in Beirut city. In this cross-sectional study, 512 exercisers, aged between 20 and 50 years, were randomly selected from gyms. The intake of nutritional supplements was reported among 36.3% (95% confidence interval 32.2-40.5) of participants, with a weak presence of medical supervision. Patterns of supplement use differed by gender and age. Men and younger exercisers were found to focus on supplements associated with performance enhancement and muscle building, while women and older exercisers were more concerned with health-promoting products such as vitamins, minerals, and herbal supplements. An appropriate dissemination of accurate and scientifically sound information regarding the benefits and side effects of nutritional supplements is highly recommended in the sports environment in Beirut city.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".