MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Increase of Healthy Food Quality among the Kazakhstan Population

2018· article· en· W2890247709 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zura Yessimsiitova, Н.Т. Аблайханова, S. Sagyndykova, Gulmira Tussupbekova, Marzhan Kulbayeva, Gulshat Atanbayeva, Mengtay Aitzhan, Zhanat Bissenbayeva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy and Nutrition Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet, Metabolism, and Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthPopulationAdaptation (eye)Quality (philosophy)Work (physics)Quality of life (healthcare)BusinessHealthy foodFood preparationMedicineFood processingPsychologyFood scienceBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At present, one of the most important urgent issues is the study of healthy nutrition of the population of Kazakhstan. Proper nutrition ensures the growth and development of children, contributes to the prevention of diseases, increase the capacity for work and prolong the life of people, while creating conditions for adequate adaptation to the environment.Most of the population of Kazakhstan because of technological processing, the use of inadequate food raw materials, influence of other causes, does not receive the necessary amount of essential components of food, which lead to illnesses, premature aging and shortening of life.The situation aggravates by the low cultural level of the population in matters of rational nutrition and the lack of skills for healthy lifestyles.In this regard, the main task in the work was to study methods of improving the health and quality of life of the population of Kazakhstan, especially those living in zones of environmental problems and contacting with harmful factors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy and Nutrition SciencesSame topicDiet, Metabolism, and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207