Dietary patterns in the healthy oldest old in the healthy aging study and the Canadian longitudinal study of aging: a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Very few people live to eighty-five years and older (the 'oldest old'), and even fewer live to this age without developing chronic diseases. It is important to understand the relationship, if any, of modifiable factors such as diet on healthy aging. However, there are few studies of diet among healthy oldest old, especially in North American populations. We aimed to characterize dietary patterns among 'super-seniors' (SS) within the Canadian Healthy Aging Study. METHODS: 122 SS aged 85 years or older and free of cancer, cardiovascular or pulmonary disease, dementia and diabetes were recruited. Comparisons were made to 12,626 participants aged 65-86 in the Canadian Longitudinal Study of Aging who completed the same 36-item food frequency questionnaire that queried consumption over the prior 12 months of nutrients and foods thought to be important for aging. Dietary patterns were identified with principal component analysis. The odds of being a SS were determined for quartiles of each dietary pattern with logistic regression. RESULTS: Two dietary patterns were identified; a western diet characterized by french fries, red meat, processed meat and a nutrient-rich diet which included fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts and seeds among other healthy food choices. Higher scores for both dietary patterns were associated with increased odds of being a SS, however, only the western dietary pattern remained associated with adjustment for covariates (Quartile 4: OR = 3.21, 95% CI 1.91-5.51). CONCLUSIONS: Our finding adds to the limited evidence on dietary intake among the healthiest oldest old but it is unclear whether assocations reflect generational differences between groups or possible contributions to longevity.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".