MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913863988 · doi:10.3390/ijerph16030311

Trimester-Specific Assessment of Diet Quality in a Sample of Canadian Pregnant Women

2019· article· en· W2913863988 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Claudia Savard, Simone Lemieux, Élise Carbonneau, Véronique Provencher, Claudia Gagnon, Julie Robitaille, Anne‐Sophie Morisset

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersDanone Institute of Canada
KeywordsMedicineUnderweightPregnancyOverweightFirst trimesterBody mass indexObesitySecond trimesterDemographyPublic healthObstetricsEnvironmental healthGerontologyGestationEndocrinologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study aimed to (1) examine changes in diet quality throughout pregnancy and (2) identify maternal characteristics associated with trimester-specific diet quality. Pregnant women (n = 79) were recruited in their 1st trimester of pregnancy and completed, at each trimester, three web-based 24-hour dietary recalls, from which the Canadian Healthy Eating Index (HEI) was calculated. Physical activity, nutrition knowledge, and socio-demographic web-questionnaires were also completed. Although no variation in total HEI scores was observed across trimesters, we found an overall decrease in the following subscores: adequacy, total fruits and vegetables, unsaturated fats and saturated fats (p < 0.05). In the 1st trimester, overweight and obese pregnant women had a lower diet quality in comparison with normal-weight and underweight women (HEI scores: 63.1 ± 11.9 vs. 68.0 ± 9.3; p = 0.04). In the 3rd trimester, women younger than 28 years old, with no university degree, poorer nutrition knowledge and who reside in an urban setting, had a lower diet quality (p < 0.05). In conclusion, less educated, younger women who reside in an urban setting may be at a higher risk of poor diet quality in late pregnancy and could benefit from public health programs.

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 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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations65
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207