MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W22902485

Children's bone health and meeting calcium needs.

2008· article· en· W22902485 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Judy More

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeak bone massOsteoporosisBone massBone healthMedicinePublic healthGovernment (linguistics)CalciumEnvironmental healthQuarter (Canadian coin)GerontologyPediatricsDemographyEndocrinologyInternal medicineBone mineralGeographyPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One in two women and one in five men suffer from osteoporotic fractures after the age of 50. Enabling children and young people to develop strong bones and achieve their maximum potential bone mass will help prevent undue bone loss and osteoporosis in later life. Although 70-80% of peak bone mass is genetically determined, the remainder is determined by dietary and environmental factors. The most important dietary factor for bone health is calcium, which in the UK is obtained mainly from dairy foods (45%) and cereal-based foods (27%). In the UK one-quarter of teenage girls consume insufficient calcium to meet their minimum dietary requirements. The majority of teenage boys and girls fail to meet the UK Government's targets for calcium intakes. This is an important public health issue as 90% of peak bone mass is attained by the age of approximately 18 years in girls and 20 years in boys. Health professionals need to be aware of the importance of childhood and adolescence for building healthy bones and to work with this age group to promote the dietary and lifestyle factors that contribute to bone health and peak bone mass. They could usefully include advice on including three helpings of calcium in the diet each day, as highlighted in the current "3-a-Day" campaign.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207