Association between dietary insulin index and load and psychological disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was carried out to determine whether the dietary insulin index (DII) and dietary insulin load (DIL) are related to psychological disorders in a cross-sectional study among adults. A total of 3172 Iranian adults (age range of 18-55 years) were included. Data on dietary intakes were collected using a validated dish-based 106-item semi-quantitative FFQ. DII and DIL were calculated using food insulin index values published earlier. To assess depression and anxiety, an Iranian validated version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used. Furthermore, psychological distress was examined using the General Health Questionnaire. Among women, a significant positive association was seen; such that women in the highest quartile of DIL had higher odds of depression than those in the lowest quartile (OR 1·84; 95 % CI 1·14, 2·96). In terms of DII, in the fully adjusted model, women in the top quartile of DII were more likely to be depressed compared with those in the bottom quartile (OR 1·65; 95 % CI 1·05, 2·58). In conclusion, we found a significant positive association between DIL and DII and odds of depression among women, but not in men. However, such findings were not seen for anxiety and psychological distress.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".