Nutrition as a determinant of functional autonomy and quality of life in aging: a research program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the aging of the Canadian population, functional autonomy and quality of life among seniors are now important public health issues. We hypothesized that nutrition is an important determinant of the quality of aging because of its potential to modulate the transitions from vulnerability to frailty and dependence. Over the past 15 years, our research program addressed the prevalence, the determinants, and the consequences of undernutrition among seniors, especially the free-living frail elderly. Very low energy and nutrient intakes were observed as well as a high prevalence of involuntary weight loss. These chronic conditions were associated with early institutionalization and increased mortality rates. Intervention strategies were then developed and evaluated, including the Nutrition Screening Program and the Nutrition Support Program. The effectiveness of these programs was shown with respect to improvement of nutritional status. However, this improvement was not sufficient to produce significant changes in functional autonomy or quality of life. Methodological issues related to the conduct of intervention studies in this specific population were addressed. A conceptual framework of nutritional intervention is currently being validated. A large longitudinal study that is being undertaken will further contribute to our understanding of the aging process as determined by a modifiable factor such as nutrition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".