International summit on the nutrition of adolescent girls and young women: consensus statement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An international summit focusing on the difficult challenge of providing adequate nutrition for adolescent girls and young women in low- and middle-income countries was held in Portland, Oregon in 2015. Sixty-seven delegates from 17 countries agreed on a series of recommendations that would make progress toward improving the nutritional status of girls and young women in countries where their access to nutrition is compromised. Delegate recommendations include: (1) elevate the urgency of nutrition for girls and young women to a high international priority, (2) raise the social status of girls and young women in all regions of the world, (3) identify major knowledge gaps in the biology of adolescence that could be filled by robust research efforts, (4) and improve access to nutrient-rich foods for girls and young women. Attention to these recommendations would improve the health of young women in all nations of the world.
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 | 0.078 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.030 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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".