MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Urgent need for folic acid fortification of flour and grains: response to the 2019 UK Government’s public consultation

2019· review· en· W2994687577 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicholas Wald, Joan K. Morris, Colin Blakemore

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Disease in Childhood · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFortificationFolic acidFood fortificationVitaminGovernment (linguistics)PopulationEnvironmental healthPregnancyPediatricsFood scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In June 2019, the UK Government took a step forward towards making a decision on the mandatory fortification of flour with folic acid (vitamin B9) in the prevention of neural tube defects (NTDs). It issued an open public consultation on the proposal in the form of a set of questions. The questions covered a range of issues including efficacy, safety, feasibility and cost. This review sets out the nine main questions and our answers. The aim is to present the rationale for mandatory fortification, what products should be fortified and the mean daily folic acid intake increase fortification should achieve across the population. ### Do you agree or disagree with the proposal for mandatory fortification of non-wholemeal wheat flour in the UK with folic acid to help prevent NTDs? Answer: The evidence strongly supports agreeing with the proposal. In 1991, the report of the Medical Research Council (MRC) Vitamin Study,1 a randomised trial, showed that most cases of NTDs can be prevented by increasing folic acid intake immediately prior to pregnancy and in the early stages of pregnancy. Other studies have confirmed these results and over 80 countries have introduced mandatory fortification of flour and/or grains with folic acid. There has been no indication of any adverse effect in any of these countries, including the USA and Canada. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have recently estimated that in the USA, fortification has saved 1300 children each year from death or a lifetime of handicap—a total of more than 27 000 since 1998 when fortification was introduced in the USA.2 In 2015, it was estimated that over 2000 children would have been saved each year from death or a lifetime handicap if folic acid fortification had been implemented in the UK at the same time as it was in the USA.3 Women have been advised to take folic acid supplements before pregnancy and in early pregnancy. This is the current …

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0510.030
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.007

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Disease in ChildhoodSame topicFolate and B Vitamins ResearchFrench-language works237,207