Gender associated differences in diet and anthropometric measures in Cape Breton Caucasians with well-controlled type 2 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diet and anthropometic measures are important indicators of risk of various complications in type 2 diabetics. The purpose was to assess the hypothesis that there would be gender differences in anthropometric measures and dietary intakes for energy and energy-yielding nutrients including oleic acid in the study population of well-controlled (HbA1c < 8 %) Caucasian type 2 diabetics. Males (n=18) and females (n = 14) participated. Subjects came in for two visits each 3 months apart. Males differed from females only in height (m) (1.72 + 0.02 vs 1.59 ± 0.01), hip circumference (cm) (103.0 ± 1.4 vs 117.8 ± 3.9), waist to hip ratio (0.99 ± 0.01 vs 0.87 ± 0.01 and waist to height ratio (0.591 ± 0.010 vs 0.640 ± 0.018). Despite a higher intake for total calories in males and similar intakes for the energy yielding nutrients including oleic acid in the study population of type 2 diabetics, males and females had similar weights and waist circumferences while males had greater waist to hip ratios, lesser waist to height ratios and very a strong trend toward lesser BMI. Females are further away from recommended anthropometric targets and as such appear to be at greater risk of complications from type 2 diabetes.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".