MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519782240 · doi:10.1139/apnm-2016-0146

Dietary assessment is a critical element of health research – Perspective from the Partnership for Advancing Nutritional and Dietary Assessment in Canada

2016· article· en· W2519782240 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marie‐Ève Labonté, Sharon I. Kirkpatrick, Rhonda C. Bell, Beatrice A. Boucher, Ilona Csizmadi, Anita Koushik, Mary R. L’Abbé, Isabelle Massarelli, Paula J. Robson, Isabelle Rondeau, Bryna Shatenstein, Amy F. Subar, Benoı̂t Lamarche

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalHealth CanadaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalAlberta Health ServicesCancer Care OntarioUniversité LavalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of TorontoAlberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipPerspective (graphical)Psychological interventionKnowledge translationPolitical scienceEnvironmental healthMedicineKnowledge managementNursingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Challenges and complexities associated with assessing dietary intakes are numerous, but not insurmountable. This opinion paper from Canadian researchers draws attention to the importance of building capacity and providing funding opportunities for research in dietary assessment methods in Canada and elsewhere. Such strategies would contribute to a better understanding of the roles played by diet in human health and better translation of this information into the most meaningful and effective dietary guidelines, policies, and interventions.

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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0170.015
Scholarly communication0.0180.006
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0090.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.329 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations28
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207