Folate: A Key to Optimizing Health and Reducing Disease Risk in the Elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inadequate folate status is associated with an increased risk for chronic diseases that may have a negative impact on the health of the aging population. Folate, a water-soluble vitamin, includes naturally occurring food folate and synthetic folic acid in supplements and fortified foods. Inadequate folate status may result in hyperhomocysteinemia, a significant risk factor for atherosclerotic vascular disease, changes in DNA that may result in pro-carcinogenic effects and increased risk for cognitive dysfunction. Folate status may be negatively influenced by inadequate intake, genetic polymorphisms and interactions with various drugs. In the US, folic acid is now added to enriched grain products and continues to be included in the majority of ready-to-eat breakfast cereals. Recent data indicate that the folate status in the US population has improved significantly, presumably due to the effects of fortification. Folic acid (not food folate) intake in excess of the Tolerable Upper Intake Level may mask the diagnosis of a vitamin B(12) deficiency, which is more prevalent in the elderly than younger individuals. When folic acid supplements are recommended, a multivitamin that includes vitamin B(12) should also be advised. To safely and effectively increase folate intake in the elderly, naturally occurring folate-rich food sources should be promoted. Folate-rich foods include orange juice, dark green leafy vegetables, asparagus, strawberries and legumes. These foods are also excellent sources of other health-promoting nutrients associated with chronic disease risk reduction.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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".