<i>Fermented Dairy Products:</i> Knowledge and Consumption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Much has been published on the nutritional and health benefits of fermented dairy products, especially those containing probiotic microorganisms. However, consumers may not be familiar with the term "fermented dairy products," and therefore may not take full advantage of them. University students' knowledge and consumption patterns of fermented dairy products were assessed. METHODS: University students (n=223) completed a survey consisting of a section on demographics and another on knowledge and consumption patterns. RESULTS: The majority of respondents (62%) were not familiar with the term "fermented dairy products." Most respondents consumed yogourt a few times a week (40%) or a few times a month (30%). Almost all respondents (92%) were unable to identify the difference between regular and probiotic yogourt. Most respondents (93%) had not heard of acidophilus milk, but the majority (65%) would be willing to try it. Most respondents were unsure whether sour cream (65%), yogourt beverages (74%), and cheddar cheese (61%) were fermented dairy products. Sixty percent of respondents never consumed yogourt drinks. CONCLUSIONS: Education is needed about fermented dairy products, especially probiotics, and their nutritional and health benefits. Such education may increase their acceptability and consumption.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".