MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The association of ready to eat cereal (RTEC) at breakfast with diet quality and adiposity in African‐American (AA) and Hispanic‐American (HA) children 1 to 18 years: Results from NHANES, 1999–2002

2008· article· en· W2288640470 on OpenAlexaff
Brandy M Williams, Solange Pineda Vargas, Carol E. O’Neil, Debra R. Keast, Susan S. Cho, Theresa A. Nicklas

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsNutrasource
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceNiacinMedicineMathematicsNutrientFood scienceChemistryInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to examine the association of an RTEC breakfast with diet quality and weight of AA (n=2377) and HA (n=3236) 1 to 18 y in NHANES, 1999–2002. Three breakfast groups were: skippers, RTEC, and other breakfast (OB); age groups were 1–5, 6–12, 13–18 y. Mean adequacy ratio (MAR) score was the average percentage of the Estimated Average Requirement obtained from 24 hour recall intake of vitamins A, E, C, B1, B2, B6, B12; niacin; folate; phosphorus; magnesium; iron; and zinc. MAR and weight measures (mean±SE) of breakfast groups were compared using SUDAAN. Age was related to skipping and type of breakfast: for 1–5 v. 6–12 v. 13–18y, 7.4% v.16.9% v.36.8% of AA, and 4.9% v. 8.9% v. 28.3% of HA skipped; 45% v. 38% v. 19.4% of AA, and 40.5% v. 33.9% v. 22.1% of HA ate RTEC. MAR for AA was highest in RTEC (97.3 [1–5], 94.7 [6–12], 92.1 [13–18y]) (p<0.05). For HA 1–5y, MAR was higher for RTEC (97.2±0.2) than OB (95.7±0.4), but not skippers (92.8±2.1); in HA 6–12y, MAR of RTEC (95.4±0.6) was higher than skippers (84.9±1.3); in HA 13–18y MAR of RTEC (91.1±0.5) was highest (p<0.05). In AA and HA 2–18y there were no differences in z‐score of BMI‐for age; in AA 2–18y only waist circumference (cm) was lowest in RTEC (66.5±0.3) v skippers (68.7±0.7) or OB (68.2±0.4). There were ethnic differences in breakfast consumption patterns, and adiposity of 2–18y AA and HA; diet quality improved with RTEC in both groups. Support: USDA & Kellogg's.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet→French-language works237,207→