Total Usual Intake of Shortfall Nutrients Varies With Poverty Among US Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine shortfall nutrient intakes (ie, calcium, folate, potassium, magnesium, and vitamins A, C, D, and E) by poverty-to-income ratio (PIR). DESIGN: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012, a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: US adults with complete data on poverty status and diet were included (n = 4,524). ANALYSIS: The National Cancer Institute method was used to estimate total usual micronutrient intakes from foods, beverages, medications, and dietary supplements reported on 2 24-hour dietary recalls using measurement error correction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Calcium, folate, potassium, magnesium, and vitamins A, C, D, and E across 3 PIR categories: <130%, 130% to 350%, and ≥350%. RESULTS: Mean intakes of folate, vitamin C, and vitamin D were significantly greater in men, and magnesium in women, across all PIR categories. Except for calcium in men and vitamin C in women, the highest PIR category had significantly higher mean total usual intakes of all remaining shortfall micronutrients. Importantly, men and women in the highest PIR category (≥350%) were significantly less likely to have intakes below the Estimated Average Requirement across all micronutrients compared with those in the lower PIR categories. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Even with dietary supplements, large proportions of US adults have micronutrient intakes below the Estimated Average Requirement. Adults at the highest adjusted income have higher micronutrient intakes and lower risk of inadequacy than those with lower incomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".