MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130847058 · doi:10.3148/68.1.2007.14

<i>Nursing Home Food Services</i>Linked with Risk of Malnutrition

2007· article· en· W2130847058 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Natalie Carrier, Denise Ouellet, Gale E. West

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'AlimentationUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalnutritionNursingNursing homesEnvironmental healthMedicineGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Links between food service characteristics and residents' risk of malnutrition were examined. METHODS: Cognitively intact residents meeting inclusion criteria and living in one of 38 participating nursing homes were randomly sampled. The final sample consisted of 132 residents, who were screened for risk of malnutrition and completed a face-to-face interview questionnaire about dining experiences. Additional data came from participants' medical charts, and each institution's food service manager completed a written questionnaire. Frequencies and logistic regressions were used to describe the sample and to examine relationships between risk of malnutrition and food service characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, 37.4% of participants were at risk of malnutrition. Food service factors, including food packages, lids, and dishes that were difficult to manipulate (b=0.285, p=0.009), bulk food-delivery systems (b=1.329, p=0.036), overall food satisfaction (b=0.253, p=0.044), menu cycle length (b=-2.162, p=0.003), and porcelain dishes (b=-0.345, p=0.052), all were significantly associated with risk of malnutrition. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings clearly show a need for nursing homes to modify certain aspects of food service that may increase the risk of malnutrition among cognitively intact residents.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations49
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and ResearchSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207