MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152779135 · doi:10.15537/1658-3175.4617

Comparison of a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire with 24-hour dietary recalls to assess dietary intake of adult Kuwaitis

2009· article· en· W2152779135 on OpenAlexaff
Mahshid Dehghan, Nawal Al‐Hamad, Catherine McMillan, Prasanna Prakash, Anwar T. Merchant

Bibliographic record

VenueSaudi Medical Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFood frequency questionnaireEnvironmental healthPopulationFood intakeAdded sugarFood scienceObesityBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lifestyle of the residents of Arab and Persian Gulf countries is changing due to globalization. They consume more fat, meat, fast foods, and sugar than before. 1 To assess an individuals’ dietary intake, a valid dietary tool is needed. We developed such an instrument for the population of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The foods consumed in UAE, however, are influenced by its large multicultural immigrant population, and are not typical of those eaten in other countries in the region. Thus, it was necessary to develop such an instrument. It is necessary to validate any food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) that are developed for specific populations, as incorrect information may lead to false associations between dietary factors and diseases or disease-related markers. 2 We developed a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire (SFFQ) and accompanying food composition database for Kuwait. The SFFQ effectively captures the type and quantity of food the population in Kuwait usually eat, and their frequency. When these data are combined with the food composition table for Kuwait, it is possible to determine long-term nutrient intake for this population. The developed SFFQ listed standard portions of food items traditionally consumed in Kuwait, and intake frequencies for the food items consisted of 9 categories ranging from “never/once a month” to “more than 6

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSaudi Medical JournalSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207