MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2907192562 · doi:10.3390/nu11010070

Narrative Review of Hydration and Selected Health Outcomes in the General Population

2019· review· en· W2907192562 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersPepsiCo
KeywordsMoodCognitionPopulationMedicineGerontologyPsychologyClinical psychologyEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although adequate hydration is essential for health, little attention has been paid to the effects of hydration among the generally healthy population. This narrative review presents the state of the science on the role of hydration in health in the general population, specifically in skin health, neurological function (i.e., cognition, mood, and headache), gastrointestinal and renal functions, and body weight and composition. There is a growing body of evidence that supports the importance of adequate hydration in maintaining proper health, especially with regard to cognition, kidney stone risk, and weight management. However, the evidence is largely associative and lacks consistency, and the number of randomized trials is limited. Additionally, there are major gaps in knowledge related to health outcomes due to small variations in hydration status, the influence of sex and sex hormones, and age, especially in older adults and children.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.353 · 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