MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2342931544 · doi:10.1177/0148607115624084

Human Protein and Amino Acid Requirements

2016· article· en· W2342931544 on OpenAlexaff
L. John Hoffer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmino acidGlutamineNitrogen balanceBiochemistryProtein catabolismProtein metabolismEssential amino acidProtein turnoverCatabolismComplete proteinProtein biosynthesisMetabolismBiologyChemistryNitrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human protein and amino acid nutrition encompasses a wide, complex, frequently misunderstood, and often contentious area of clinical research and practice. This tutorial explains the basic biochemical and physiologic principles that underlie our current understanding of protein and amino acid nutrition. The following topics are discussed: (1) the identity, measurement, and essentiality of nutritional proteins; (2) the definition and determination of minimum requirements; (3) nutrition adaptation; (4) obligatory nitrogen excretion and the minimum protein requirement; (5) minimum versus optimum protein intakes; (6) metabolic responses to surfeit and deficient protein intakes; (7) body composition and protein requirements; (8) labile protein; (9) N balance; (10) the principles of protein and amino acid turnover, including an analysis of the controversial indicator amino acid oxidation technique; (11) general guidelines for evaluating protein turnover articles; (12) amino acid turnover versus clearance; (13) the protein content of hydrated amino acid solutions; (14) protein requirements in special situations, including protein-catabolic critical illness; (15) amino acid supplements and additives, including monosodium glutamate and glutamine; and (16) a perspective on the future of protein and amino acid nutrition research. In addition to providing practical information, this tutorial aims to demonstrate the importance of rigorous physiologic reasoning, stimulate intellectual curiosity, and encourage fresh ideas in this dynamic area of human nutrition. In general, references are provided only for topics that are not well covered in modern textbooks.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.021

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations115
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Parenteral and Enteral NutritionSame topicClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFrench-language works237,207