Economic Burden of Not Complying with Canadian Food Recommendations in 2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poor diet has been identified as a major cause of chronic disease. In this study we estimated the 2018 economic burden of chronic disease attributable to not complying with Canadian food recommendations. We retrieved the chronic disease risk estimates for intakes of both protective (fruit, vegetables, milk, whole grains, nuts and seeds) and harmful foods (sugar-sweetened beverages, processed meat, red meat) from the Global Burden of Disease Study, and food intakes from the 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey 24-hour dietary recalls (n = 19,797). Population attributable fractions (PAFs) were calculated for all food–chronic disease combinations, and mathematically adjusted to estimate the 2018 annual direct (hospital, physician, drug) and indirect (human capital approach) economic burden for each disease. Not meeting the eight food recommendations was estimated to be responsible for CAD$15.8 billion/year in direct (CAD$5.9 billion) and indirect (CAD$9.9 billion) costs. The economic burden of Canadians under-consuming healthful foods exceeded the burden of overconsumption of harmful foods (CAD$12.5 billion vs. CAD$3.3 billion). Our findings suggest poor diet represents a substantial economic burden in Canada. Interventions may be more effective if they are wide in focus and promote decreased consumption of harmful foods alongside increased consumption of healthful foods, with emphasis on whole grains and nuts and seeds.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".