MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2615008467 · doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2016.11.008

Total Usual Intake of Shortfall Nutrients Varies With Poverty Among US Adults

2017· article· en· W2615008467 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Regan L Bailey, Sharon Akabas, Erin E. Paxson, Sowmyanarayanan Thuppal, Shilpa Saklani, Katherine L. Tucker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nutrition Education and Behavior · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthPharmavite
KeywordsMicronutrientNational Health and Nutrition Examination SurveyEnvironmental healthDietary Reference IntakeNutrientMedicinePovertyVitaminVitamin D and neurologyAnimal scienceBiologyPopulationEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations67
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nutrition Education and BehaviorSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207