Bibliographic record
Abstract

 
 
 introduction: geophagy is a human behaviour involving the ingestion of earthy substances such as soil and clay. common among pregnant women in rural, tropical areas, it is culturally accepted within some societies and stigmatized within others. There is no scientific consensus on the effects of geophagy on human health. This study was developed as a comprehensive diagnostic to assess the causes, social aspects and potential health impacts of geophagy among pregnant women in rural Panama. Methods: private, structured interviews (n=41) were carried out with women in ten subsistence community farms in the province of Veraguas and the ngöbe-bugle comarca. Additional interviews with healthcare workers were conducted at nearby healthcare facilities. five soil samples were collected in locations indicated by confirmed geophagists, subjected to simulated human digestion and analyzed for mineral composition and parasite eggs. results: There is no cultural or religious element to the practice; rather it seems to be driven by physiological desires tied to the smell of the material. prevalence is higher among women with lower education levels and poorer nutritional status suggesting that the practice is associated with low socioeconomic status. soil analysis did not indicate presence of parasites, but there are potential nutritional benefits of the practice by providing essential minerals missing in the diet. discussion: we find that geophagy in panama may offer nutritional benefits. however, without a clearer understanding of specific effects of soil in the gastrointestinal tract, it is difficult to determine direct biophysical impacts of geophagy.
 
 
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 | 0.013 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".