<i>Diet, Obesity and Education</i>in Three Age Groups of Saskatchewan Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on relationships between socioeconomic status and Canadians' diet is limited. The current study investigated differences by education in dietary variables shown to be related to obesity; it included three age groups of Saskatchewan women who participated in the 1992 to 1993 Heart Health Intervention Evaluation baseline study. Multistage sampling was used to select randomly from the Saskatchewan Health Insurance Registration File. The overall response rate was 42.6%; a sample representative of the general Saskatchewan population was obtained. Three-day estimated food records and demographic information from 396 women aged 18 to 74 years were subdivided into three age categories: 18 to 34 years, 35 to 54 years, and 55 to 74 years. For the 18- to 34-year group, obesity was significantly more prevalent with lower education; trends were similar for the older age groups. Under-reporting of energy intake (indicated by an energy intake:basal metabolic rate ratio of <1.1) was related to obesity but not to education. The greatest differences in diet between educational groups were observed in the 18- to 34-year group; fewer differences existed in the 35- to 54-year group, and none in the 55- to 74-year group. Health promotion efforts need to be targeted appropriately, and based on differences in dietary intakes by socioeconomic group. Research should help promote an understanding of the reasons for differences in diet by socioeconomic 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 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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".