Potatoes, Including French Fries, Contribute Key Nutrients to Diets of U.S. Adults: NHANES 2003-2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Many adult Americans fail to meet nutrient requirements. The objective of this study was to examine 24-hour dietary recall data from NHANES 2003-2006 to test the hypothesis that white potatoes (not sweet potatoes) contributed important nutrients within energy needs to adults' diets. Potato content of survey foods was determined using US Department of Agriculture (USDA) recipe databases (Standard Reference [SR]-Link files). SR codes were linked to USDA food composition data to determine nutrient content. Daily nutrient intakes among consumers of potatoes (including french fries [FF]), and consumers of FF alone, were determined by applying the composition database to respondent's recall data. Sample weighted data were analyzed; t-tests assessed differences between age-sex groups. Approximately 35% of adults consumed potatoes; 12% consumed FF. Intakes were lowest in adults aged 51+ y (P < .01). More males, compared to females, consumed potatoes (P<.05) and FF (P< 0.01). Males consumed larger amounts of potatoes (127 g/d) and FF (85 g/d) (P< .01). In all age-sex groups, potatoes and FF provided 7-11% of total energy (within daily energy requirements); 3-14% of daily fat (>75% MUFA+PUFA); >15% dietary fiber, >13% vitamin B6 and potassium; >5% thiamin, niacin, phosphorus, magnesium and copper; and <5% sodium. Potatoes provided >10% vitamin C for all age-sex groups and >5% vitamin K and iron for most groups; FF provided >5% vitamin E and folate intakes for all. These cross-sectional data showed that potatoes and FF, in amounts consumed by adults, contributed important nutrients in line with dietary recommendations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".