Canadian Adults with Moderate Intakes of Total Sugars have Greater Intakes of Fibre and Key Micronutrients: Results from the Canadian Community Health Survey 2015 Public Use Microdata File
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Global dietary guidelines recommend reducing free sugars intake, which may affect choices of sugars-containing foods, including important sources of key micronutrients. The purpose of the study was to compare the intakes of nutrients stratified by intakes of sugars in Canadian adults. Methods: The first-day 24-h dietary recalls from adults (n = 11,817) in the 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey-Nutrition were used to compare macronutrients, micronutrients and food categories across quintiles of total sugars [by %energy (%E)], adjusted for misreporting status and covariates. Results: Canadian adults consumed on average 86.9 g/day (18.8 %E) from total sugars and 47.5 g/day (9.9 %E) from free sugars. Mean intakes for the 1st (Q1), 3rd (Q3) and 5th (Q5) quintiles of total sugars were 7.9%E, 18.3%E and 33.3%E, respectively. Q3 had higher fibre, calcium, vitamin D, vitamin A, vitamin C and potassium intakes than Q1 (p < 0.001), reflecting higher fruit, milk and yogurt (p < 0.001) consumption. Compared to Q5, Q3 had higher intakes of folate, vitamin B12, iron and zinc. Conclusion: This study provides the first detailed analyses of Canadian adults’ macro- and micro-nutrient intakes stratified by different intakes of total sugars. Moderate intakes of total sugars may result in greater intakes of fibre and micronutrients. Overall nutrient intake should be considered when making food choices.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".