MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314255291 · doi:10.2174/157339612802139460

Foods versus Drugs for Health Promotion: Considerations for Future Directions

2012· article· en· W2314255291 on OpenAlex
Peter J.H. Jones, Stephanie Jew

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Pediatric Reviews · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNutrition, Genetics, and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiseaseNutrigenomicsDisease preventionPromotion (chess)EzetimibeBiotechnologyEnvironmental healthBiologyStatinPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The series of papers in this thematic issue discuss the differences and similarities of foods versus drugs in disease prevention and treatment. The main focus of each contribution is considered in this review. The use as well as advantages and drawbacks of combination therapy employing drugs and foods are also elaborated on. Examples of combining the use of pharmaceuticals and food bioactives including using statins or ezetimibe in conjunction with plant sterols are provided. In summary, the present paper makes a case for adoption of food bioactives in both prevention and treatment approaches to disease, and recommends that functional foods can serve as efficacious adjuncts to pharmacotherapy during all stages of treatment of numerous diseases. Keywords: Bioactives, drugs, food, functional foods, health promotion, mechanisms of action, genes, health, nutrigenomics, targets

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.299 · 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