MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessing the environment for regulatory change for eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid nutrition labeling

2009· review· en· W2106587704 on OpenAlexaff
Amy M. Brownawell, William S. Harris, Joseph R. Hibbeln, David M. Klurfeld, Ian Newton, Allison A. Yates

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Reviews · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsCustom Security Industries (Canada)
FundersRural Development AdministrationGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsDocosahexaenoic acidEicosapentaenoic acidPolyunsaturated fatty acidFish oilDietary Reference IntakeFood sciencePopulationLong chainOmega 3 fatty acidMedicineFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental healthBiologyPhysiologyFatty acidChemistryBiochemistryNutrientEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review examines issues related to the development of a recommended daily allowance or adequate intake, two of the categories of dietary reference intakes, for the long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (omega-3 PUFAs), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA, 20:5 n-3), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, 22:6 n-3). Although some have suggested a dietary intake of two servings of fatty fish per week or supplement intake of 500 mg/day EPA plus DHA, based on evidence from epidemiologic and clinical studies of cardiovascular benefit from regular fish or fish-oil consumption, supplementation with EPA and/or DHA may also have antidepressant and mood-stabilizing effects. Omega-3 PUFA biology is complex and chronic disease outcomes are sometimes difficult to prove, yet the possibility of benefit for a substantial portion of the population from increased omega-3 PUFA intake is a public health issue that must be addressed responsibly and be based on significant scientific evidence.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition ReviewsSame topicFatty Acid Research and HealthFrench-language works237,207