MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Measuring Modified Mass Energy Equivalence in Nutritional Epidemiology: A Proposal to Adapt the Biophysical Modelling Approach

2016· article· en· W2510935139 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Azizur Rahman, Md. Abdul Hakim

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDietingConfoundingPopulationEnergy (signal processing)Environmental healthSample (material)MedicineEpidemiologyGerontologyPsychologyObesityMathematicsWeight lossStatisticsEndocrinologyPathologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The calculation of net dietary energy is in great triumph on the helm of designing an apt dieting for both the therapeutic and normal diet. There are some procedures in this connection in nutritional science which is relatively time consuming, laboratory tests induced and often the misleading data contributors in view of assuring balanced dieting. The dietician is often at bay to approve an exact dieting to sustain health and nutritional soundness adhering to the existing dietary energy measuring methods because the frequently using methods are not informing the net dietary energy level required at all in correct amount for the sample at a population in a community. The aim of the current study is to make a dot over these ongoing panics exploring an easy and accurate way in prescribing a confounding free diet. The study can divulge an open secret in measuring net dietary energy which is mandatory for dieting practices worldwide to resist the possible health horrors in nutritional epidemiology. The study finding is the Modified Mass Energy Equivalence [equation (xi)] can be an outstanding biophysical model in measuring net dietary energy as a dieting tool in health pedagogy of health science.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.265
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical ResearchSame topicDiet and metabolism studiesFrench-language works237,207