Association of modified Nordic diet with cardiovascular risk factors among type 2 diabetes patients: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is one of the most important causes of mortality. Healthy diets can decrease CVDs and other chronic diseases especially in patients with type 2 diabetes. In this study, we investigate association between adherence to the modified Nordic diet and cardiovascular risk factors among patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among 339 type 2 diabetic patients. Anthropometric indices, blood pressure, and biochemical tests were evaluated. A validated and reliable semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) was used to assess dietary intake. Nordic diet scores were calculated based on median intakes of six food groups. Results: Body mass index (BMI) was higher among participants who were in the lowest tertile of adherence to the Nordic diet (P = 0.006). There was a significant association between socioeconomic status (SES) and adherence to the Nordic diet (P < 0.0001). Participants who were in the top category of adherence to the diet had significantly lower levels of aspartate aminotransferase (AST) (P < 0.0001). There was a significant inverse association between adherence to the Nordic diet and low density lipoprotein (LDL) levels (odds ratio [OR] = 0.29 95% CI: 0.09, 0.91, P = 0.025), high systolic blood pressure (SBP) levels (OR = 0.35 95% CI = 0.17-0.74, P = 0.015), and risk of obesity (OR = 0.25 95% CI: 0.10, 0.63, P = 0.03).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".