MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Role of Folate on Colorectal Cancer in the Arabian Gulf Cooperation Council Countries: An Overview

2013· article· en· W2140280329 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mostafa I. Waly, Yahya Al‐Farsi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Clinical Nutrition · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlourishingUrbanizationPer capitaLife styleConsumption (sociology)Colorectal cancerEconomic growthDevelopment economicsMedicineCancerEnvironmental healthEconomicsPsychologySociologyPopulationSocial scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Driven by the boom of wealth brought by oil discovery and production, the high rate of urbanization and a steady increase in the per capita income, during the past years, has improved the socio-economic status of the people in the Arabian Gulf Cooperation Countries (GCC). This radical economic change has been accompanied by drastic changes in their lifestyle and food consumption patterns. During the past years, the regular consumption of traditional foods is being replaced with more Western-style and ready-made foods. In addition to adopting a sedentary life style in daily life and other related activities. According to National Health Survies in the GCC countries, high daily caloric intake, refined carbohydrates and protein were associated with increased risk of noncommunicable diseases including colorectal cancer (CRC). The rate of CRC among GCC countries is in the rise; however, there is dearth of research exploring it. In particular, there is lack of research about role of folate on occurrence of CRC despite the recent flourishing scientific research papers from other parts of the world.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Clinical NutritionSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207