Differences in the Quantity and Types of Foods and Beverages Consumed by Canadians between 2004 and 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined differences in food and beverage intake estimated from nationally representative surveys of Canadians in 2004 and 2015 collected through the Canadian Community Health Surveys. Differences in mean daily energy intake and amounts of food consumed were compared between 2004 and 2015 and across age groups for all energy reporters (aged 2 years+) and among only plausible energy reporters. From 2004 to 2015, mean energy intake decreased by 228 kcal/day (all energy reporters) and 74 kcal/day (plausible energy reporters). Canadians reported consuming more daily servings of meat and alternatives but fewer servings of vegetables and fruit and milk and alternatives in 2015 compared to 2004. Analyses of food subgroups revealed that Canadians reported consuming more daily servings of dark green and orange vegetables, dairy products, legumes, nuts and seeds, and eggs but fewer servings of potatoes, other vegetables, fruit juices, fluid milk, and sugar-sweetened beverages in 2015 compared to 2004. While some aspects of the Canadian diet have improved, daily mean intake of other nutritious foods either stagnated or worsened over time. Continued attention is needed to improve population-level intakes of vegetables, fruit, whole grains, and protein foods such as legumes, nuts, seeds, and lower fat dairy products.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".