The Science of Salt: A Systematic Review of Quality Clinical Salt Outcome Studies June 2014 to May 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies identified from an updated systematic review (from June 2014 to May 2015) on the impact of dietary salt intake on clinical and population health are reviewed. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and meta-analyses of these study types on the effect of sodium intake on blood pressure, or any substantive adverse health outcomes were identified from MEDLINE searches and quality indicators were used to select studies that were relevant to clinical and public health. From 6920 studies identified in the literature search, 144 studies were selected for review, of which only three (n=233,680) met inclusion criteria. Between them, the three studies demonstrated a harmful association between excess dietary salt and all-cause mortality, noncardiovascular and cardiovascular disease mortality, and headache. None of the included studies found harm from lowering dietary salt. The findings of this systematic review are consistent with the large body of research supportive of efforts to reduce population salt intake and congruent with our last annual review from June 2013 to May 2014.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.096 | 0.138 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".