MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2907574845 · doi:10.3390/nu11010072

Assessment of Dietary Intake and Nutrient Gaps, and Development of Food-Based Recommendations, among Pregnant and Lactating Women in Zinder, Niger: An Optifood Linear Programming Analysis

2019· article· en· W2907574845 on OpenAlexfundno aff
K. Ryan Wessells, Elaine Ferguson, Césaire T. Ouédraogo, M. Thierno Faye, Sonja Y. Hess

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of California, DavisGlobal Affairs CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsLactationNutrientPregnancyEnvironmental healthMedicineFood scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pregnant and lactating women in rural Niger are at high risk for inadequate intakes of multiple micronutrients. Thus, 24 h dietary recalls were conducted and analyzed for dietary intakes in this population (n = 202). Using linear programming analyses, micronutrient gaps in women’s diets were identified, food-based recommendations (FBR) to improve dietary micronutrient adequacy were developed, and various supplementation strategies were modelled. Energy intakes were below estimated requirements, and, for most micronutrients, >50% of women were at risk of inadequate intakes. Linear programming analyses indicated it would be difficult to select a diet that achieved recommended dietary allowances for all but three (vitamin B6, iron and zinc) of 11 modeled micronutrients. Consumption of one additional meal per day, and adherence to the selected FBR (daily consumption of dark green leafy vegetables, fermented milk, millet, pulses, and vitamin A fortified oil), would result in a low percentage of women at risk of inadequate intakes for eight modeled micronutrients (vitamin A, riboflavin, thiamin, B6, folate, iron, zinc, and calcium). Because the promotion of realistic FBRs likely will not ensure that a low percentage of women are at risk of inadequate intakes for all modeled micronutrients, multiple micronutrient supplementation or provision of nutrient-dense foods should be prioritized.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207