Habitudes alimentaires et apports nutritionnels chez les personnes présentant une dystrophie myotonique de type 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’objectif de cette étude était de décrire les habitudes alimentaires et les apports nutritionnels des patients atteints de dystrophie myotonique de type 1 (DM1). Au total, 32 femmes et 20 hommes souffrant de DM1 et suivis à la Clinique des maladies neuromusculaires de Jonquière, ont complété un journal alimentaire de 3 jours non consécutifs (2 jours de semaine et 1 jour de fin de semaine). Parmi ces patients, 13,5 % étaient en sous-poids alors que 51,9 % présentaient de l’embonpoint ou de l’obésité. Les apports moyens en lipides et en glucides ne respectaient pas l’étendue des valeurs acceptables pour ces macronutriments. Les apports moyens étaient également insuffisants pour la majorité des micronutriments. Finalement, la consommation d’aliments des quatre groupes du Guide alimentaire canadien était inférieure aux recommandations. Les résultats démontrent qu’une proportion importante des patients avec DM1 présente une alimentation inadéquate. The aim of this study was to describe the eating habits and the dietary nutritional intakes of patients affected by myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1). The participants, 32 women and 20 men suffering from DM1 and followed at the Clinique des maladies neuromusculaires de Jonquière completed a three days food journal (2 week days and 1 week-end day). Among these patients, 13.5% were underweight and 51.9% were overweight or obese. The mean carbohydrate and lipid intakes did not respect the acceptable macronutrient distribution range. In addition, the mean intakes were insufficient for most of the micronutrients. The consumption of foods from the four food groups was generally inferior to Canada’s recommendations. Results demonstrated that many individuals suffering from DM1 have an inadequate diet.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".