MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2463181135 · doi:10.3148/65.2.2004.85

<i>Nutrition and Women’s Health:</i> Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Executive Summary (1)

2004· article· en· W2463181135 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Sandra G. Affenito, Louise Lambert-Lagacé, Jane E. Kerstetter, Wendy Demark‐Wahnefried

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDietetics, Nutrition, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHealth promotionHealth careClinical nutritionHealth professionalsPromotion (chess)Affect (linguistics)NursingFamily medicineGerontologyPosition (finance)Environmental healthPublic healthPsychologyBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association (ADA) and Dietitians of Canada (DC) that women have specific nutritional needs and vulnerabilities and, as such, are at unique risk for various nutrition-related diseases and conditions that affect the duration and quality of their lives. Although women's health-related issues are multifaceted, nutrition has been shown to influence significantly the risk of chronic disease and assist in maintaining optimal health status. Therefore, the ADA and DC encourage dietetics professionals to strongly support research, health promotion activities, health care services, and advocacy efforts that will enable women to adopt desirable nutrition practices for optimal health.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.011

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.358 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and ResearchSame topicDietetics, Nutrition, and EducationFrench-language works237,207