Dietary sodium intake and overweight and obesity in children and adults: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Overweight and obesity in children and adults is a major public health concern. Emerging evidence suggests dietary sodium intake may be associated with obesity. This systematic review and meta-analysis will aim to (i) assess the relation between dietary sodium intake and measures of adiposity in children and adults and (ii) examine the relation between sodium intake and sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption, which is a known risk factor for obesity. METHODS/DESIGN: An electronic search will be conducted using Medline Complete, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase and Cochrane central register of controlled trials (CENTRAL). The search strategy will identify published peer-reviewed articles that report on dietary sodium and either a marker of adiposity or SSB consumption. Only human studies (ages >1 year) in English will be included, and no limits will be placed on publication date. No restrictions will be placed on the method of sodium intake assessment. Cross-sectional, prospective studies, and randomised controlled trials with a duration of ≥ 3 months will be included. Studies with participants with renal disease, cancer, type 1 diabetes or heart failure or who are pregnant will be excluded. To assess the quality of studies, the Cochrane's Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials will be used for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale will be used for cross-sectional and prospective studies. Meta-analysis will be used to assess the relation of sodium intake with two primary outcomes: (i) BMI and body weight in adults and BMI z-score in children and (ii) weight category (i.e. healthy weight vs. overweight/obese). For any outcomes in which meta-analysis is not possible, we will present data as a systematic review. Findings will be grouped and reported separately for children and adolescents (ages 1-17 years) and adults (ages >18 years). DISCUSSION: This review and meta-analysis will provide insight into the relation between dietary sodium intake and overweight and obesity. This information can be used to inform public health policies which target population sodium consumption. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD42015016440.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | high |
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 | 0.076 | 0.116 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.005 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".