MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2217799239 · doi:10.3148/67.1.2006.7

<i>Primary Food Sources of Nutrients</i>In the Diet of Canadian Adults

2006· article· en· W2217799239 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Louise Johnson‐Down, Heidi Ritter, Linda Jacobs Starkey, Katherine Gray‐Donald

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNutrientEnvironmental healthDairy foodsFood scienceMedicineFood groupConsumption (sociology)Food guideBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Food sources of nutrients in the Canadian diet were explored. Knowledge of these sources is important to public health professionals and to those in clinical practice. METHODS: Using data from the Food Habits of Canadians study, we investigated nutrient sources from detailed food groupings in a sample of 1,543 adults (971 women, 572 men) from across Canada. Subjects were interviewed by trained dietitians. At the time of the interview, a sociodemographic questionnaire and a 24-hour dietary recall were completed. RESULTS: The response rate was 30%. Subjects aged 18 to 34 reported eating more prepared and convenience foods than did those aged 35 to 65. Energy was contributed mainly by breads, pasta, rice, grains, and fluid milk. Protein intake was primarily derived from meat and dairy products; legumes, nuts, seeds, and eggs were not high contributors. For men aged 35 to 65 and women aged 18 to 65, butter, margarine, and oil were the primary fat sources; they were the second most common source for men aged 18 to 34. Fibre was provided by foods that are not usually considered good sources, but because of the large total consumption of these foods, they are important in Canadians' diet. The main source of calcium was dairy products, and iron came mainly from non-heme sources. CONCLUSIONS: We must understand the contributions of foods to nutrients, and distinguish "important" sources of nutrients (those consumed by many in substantial amounts) from "good" sources (foods rich in particular nutrients, whether eaten or not).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and ResearchSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207