MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593997808 · doi:10.1111/jch.12971

The Science of Salt: A regularly updated systematic review of the implementation of salt reduction interventions (March–August 2016)

2017· review· en· W2593997808 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Alvin Santos, Kathy Trieu, JoAnne Arcand, Claire Johnson, Jacqui Webster, Rachael McLean

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Hypertension · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicSodium Intake and Health
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilVicHealth
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicineReduction (mathematics)Critical appraisalIntervention (counseling)Environmental healthSystematic reviewMEDLINEAlternative medicineNursingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review aims to identify, summarize, and appraise studies reporting on the implementation of salt reduction interventions that were published between March and August 2016. Overall, 40 studies were included: four studies evaluated the impact of salt reduction interventions, while 36 studies were identified as relevant to the design, assessment, and implementation of salt reduction strategies. Detailed appraisal and commentary were undertaken on the four studies that measured the impact of the interventions. Among them, different evaluation approaches were adopted; however, all demonstrated positive health outcomes relating to dietary salt reduction. Three of the four studies measured sodium in breads and provided consistent evidence that sodium reduction in breads is feasible and different intervention options are available. None of the studies were conducted in low- or lower middle-income countries, which stresses the need for more resources and research support for the implementation of salt reduction interventions in these countries.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.305
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.236 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical HypertensionSame topicSodium Intake and HealthFrench-language works237,207