Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardioprotective properties have been associated with two fatty acids-eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). The Omega-3 Index indicates the percentage of EPA+DHA in red blood cell fatty acids. Omega-3 Index levels of the Canadian population have not been directly measured. DATA AND METHODS: Data for respondents aged 20 to 79 from cycle 3 (2012/2013) of the Canadian Health Measures Survey were used to calculate means and the prevalence of Omega-3 Index coronary heart disease (CHD) risk cut-offs-high (4% or less), moderate (more than 4% to less than 8%), and low (8% or more)-by sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics, including fish consumption and use of omega-3 supplements. Associations between the Omega-3 Index and CHD-related factors including biomarkers, risk factors, and previous CHD events, were examined in multivariate regression models. RESULTS: The mean Omega-3 Index level of Canadians aged 20 to 79 was 4.5%. Levels were higher for women, older adults, Asians and other non-white Canadians, omega-3 supplement users, and fish consumers; levels were lower for smokers and people who were obese. Fewer than 3% of adults had levels associated with low CHD risk; 43% had levels associated with high risk. No CHD-related factor was associated with the Omega-3 Index when control variables were taken into account. INTERPRETATION: Omega-3 Index levels among Canadian adults were strongly related to age, race, supplement use, fish consumption, smoking status and obesity. Fewer than 3% of adults had Omega-3 Index levels associated with low risk for CHD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".