MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066635733 · doi:10.1196/annals.1396.028

Dietary Influences on Cognitive Function with Aging

2007· review· en· W2066635733 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew D. Parrott, Carol E. Greenwood

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCognitionDementiaIngestionGlycemic indexAffect (linguistics)Cognitive declineGlycemicNeuroinflammationMedicinePhysiologyPsychologyDiabetes mellitusGerontologyEndocrinologyNeuroscienceInternal medicineInflammationDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human epidemiologic studies provide convincing evidence that dietary patterns practiced during adulthood are important contributors to age-related cognitive decline and dementia risk. Diets high in fat, especially trans and saturated fats, adversely affect cognition, while those high in fruits, vegetables, cereals, and fish are associated with better cognitive function and lower risk of dementia. While the precise physiologic mechanisms underlying these dietary influences are not completely understood, modulation of brain insulin activity and neuroinflammation likely contribute. Not surprisingly, deficits in cognitive functions, especially those dependent on the medial temporal lobes, are apparent in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Special care in food selection at meals should be exercised by those with T2DM since ingestion of rapidly absorbed, high-glycemic index carbohydrate foods further impairs medial temporal lobe function, with food-induced increases in oxidative stress and cytokine release likely explaining the association between food ingestion and reduction in cognitive function in those with T2DM.

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)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations107
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207