Dietary patterns associated with glycemic index and glycemic load among Alberta adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess the dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) of adolescents, based on a Web-based 24-h recall, and to investigate dietary predictors of GI and GL. In addition, the relationship between GI and GL and weight status was examined. A Web-based 24-h recall was completed by 4936 adolescents, aged 9-17 years; macronutrient and food group intakes were assessed using the ESHA Food Processor, the Canadian Nutrient File, and Canada's Food Guide. Dietary GI and GL were calculated based on published GI values for foods. Students provided self-reported height and mass. Multiple regression models assessed the ability of food group choices and food behaviours to predict GI and GL. Mean GI was 55 for girls and 56 for boys. Mean GL was 128 for girls and 168 for boys. Food group choices explained 26% of the variation in GI (p < 0.01) and 84% of the variation in GL (p < 0.01). The number of meals per day explained 10% (p < 0.01), and eating meals outside of the home accounted for 2.5% (p < 0.01) of the variation in GL; however, these results disappeared when adjusted for total energy intake. The GI was positively correlated with body mass index in girls (r = 0.05, p = 0.02), and GL was significantly higher among nonoverweight boys than overweight boys. This study identified eating patterns related to daily GI and GL, and suggests certain dietary patterns that could have beneficial effects on health. It also showed that GI and GL were weakly related to weight status.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".