Deficiencies in Nutritional Intake in Patients with Diabetic Foot Ulcers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: This study examined the dietary and anthropometric components of diabetic patients with or without diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Methods: Eighty-two adult subjects were recruited in Tallahassee, FL (USA) and categorized into one of three groups: subjects without diabetes, patients with Diabetes Mellitus (DM) but not foot ulcers, and patients with DFU. Twenty-four hour food recalls, foot ulcer history and blood samples were collected from each subject. Dietary intake was evaluated with Food Processor. Biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress were measured with ELISA kits. Results: DFU subjects in this study were mostly overweight or obese. DFU had inadequate intakes in protein, fiber, vitamin B1, B2, B3, B6, C, D, and E; calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc. They had excessive intakes in saturated fat, trans fat, and sodium. Conclusions: Malnutrition is very common in the DM and DFU subjects. Protein and vitamin supplementation may be beneficial in prevention and management of DM as well as DFU.
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 | 0.001 | 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".