MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081268740 · doi:10.1080/01635581003605953

Nutrients and Risk of Prostate Cancer

2010· article· en· W2081268740 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jinfu Hu, Carlo La Vecchia, Laurrie Gibbons, Eva Negri, Les Mery, Canadian Cancer Registries Epidemio

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition and Cancer · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuartileMedicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalBody mass indexLogistic regressionProstate cancerAlcohol intakePopulationCholesterolPhysiologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineCancerAlcoholBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study assesses the association between intake of protein, fats, cholesterol, and carbohydrates and the risk of prostate cancer (PCa). Between 1994 and 1997, in 8 Canadian provinces, mailed questionnaires were completed by 1,797 incident, histologically confirmed cases of PCa and 2,547 population controls. Information was collected on socioeconomic status, lifestyle habits, and diet. A 69-item food frequency questionnaire provided data on eating habits 2 yr before the study. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using unconditional logistic regression, including terms for sociodemographic factors, body mass index, alcohol, and total energy intake. Intake of trans fat was associated with the risk of PCa; the OR for the highest vs. the lowest quartile was 1.45 (95% CI = 1.16-1.81); the association was apparently stronger in subjects aged less than 65, normal weight men, and ever smokers. An increased risk was also observed with increasing intake of sucrose and disaccharides. In contrast, men in the highest quartile of cholesterol intake were at lower risk of PCa. No association was found with intake of total proteins, total fat, monounsaturated fats, polyunsaturated fats, monosaccharides, and total carbohydrates. The findings provide evidence that a diet low in trans fat could reduce PCa risk.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition and CancerSame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207