A266 IS A MULTIVITAMIN SUFFICIENT TO MEET NUTRITIOAL REQUIREMENTS IN CANADIAN ADULTS FOLLOWING A GLUTEN-FREE DIET?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Concerns exist regarding nutritional deficiencies and risk of metabolic syndrome in patients with celiac disease (CD) on a gluten-free diet (GFD). Aims This study assessed if patients with CD trying to follow a GFD meet Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) targets for macro- and micronutrients and the effect of supplement use in reaching RDA targets. Methods Adults (>16 years) with biopsy confirmed CD (Marsh 3) were recruited within 6 weeks of starting a GFD. Participants prospectively completed a 3-day food record, including dietary supplement use, at 6, 12, and 24 months after study entry. Macro- and micronutrient consumption was determined using the Nutrition Coordinating Center Food & Nutrient Database (NCCDB), USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference (USDA SR28), and CRON-O-Meter Community Database (CCDB). RDA targets were analyzed using a paired t-test and logistic regression, adjusted for age and sex. Results Forty-nine participants (71% female; mean age 49 years) completed interpretable food records at all time points. Most (59%) used supplements and supplement use was highest at 6 months (51%). Considering macronutrients, ≥88% met the RDA for carbohydrates and protein at each time point; however, only 44% met the target for fibre. Participants who took a supplement plus a multivitamin were significantly more likely than those who took only a multivitamin to meet the RDA for vitamins B12 and D. Fewer than 20% of those who took neither a multivitamin nor an iron supplement met the RDA, whereas ≥70% of those taking a multivitamin had adequate iron intake. Participants were significantly more likely to meet RDA targets for calcium with a supplement than with a multivitamin only. Even with supplementation, ≤55% met the RDA for folate. Conclusions There is a need for ongoing monitoring and dietician support for GFD treatment in CD. Adults with celiac disease met RDA targets for protein and carbohydrate, but not fibre. While specific calcium supplementation was required to meet RDA targets for calcium, a multivitamin was generally sufficient to meet RDA targets for iron, Vitamin B12 and D. Folate was below target at all time points even with supplementation. Funding Agencies CAG, CIHRNIH
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".