Beverage consumption patterns of Canadian adults aged 19 to 65 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the beverage intake patterns of Canadian adults and explore characteristics of participants in different beverage clusters. DESIGN: Analyses of nationally representative data with cross-sectional complex stratified design. SETTING: Canadian Community Health Survey, Cycle 2.2 (2004). SUBJECTS: A total of 14 277 participants aged 19-65 years, in whom dietary intake was assessed using a single 24 h recall, were included in the study. After determining total intake and the contribution of beverages to total energy intake among age/sex groups, cluster analysis (K-means method) was used to classify males and females into distinct clusters based on the dominant pattern of beverage intakes. To test differences across clusters, χ2 tests and 95 % confidence intervals of the mean intakes were used. RESULTS: Six beverage clusters in women and seven beverage clusters in men were identified. 'Sugar-sweetened' beverage clusters - regular soft drinks and fruit drinks - as well as a 'beer' cluster, appeared for both men and women. No 'milk' cluster appeared among women. The mean consumption of the dominant beverage in each cluster was higher among men than women. The 'soft drink' cluster in men had the lowest proportion of the higher levels of education, and in women the highest proportion of inactivity, compared with other beverage clusters. CONCLUSIONS: Patterns of beverage intake in Canadian women indicate high consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages particularly fruit drinks, low intake of milk and high intake of beer. These patterns in women have implications for poor bone health, risk of obesity and other morbidities.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".