MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023056862 · doi:10.1177/1559827620915708

Electrolytes and Cardiovascular Disease Risk

2020· review· en· W3023056862 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan P. Bennett, Alysha L. Deslippe, Christine Crosby, Sally Belles, Jinan Banna

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Lifestyle Medicine · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicSodium Intake and Health
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiseaseBlood pressureSodiumDietary SodiumIntensive care medicineCardiovascular healthEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between sodium intake and blood pressure is a well-studied phenomenon; however, the impact of sodium intake on cardiovascular disease risk and mortality is controversial. Recent studies conclude that weak evidence exists to support sodium restriction for the prevention of cardiovascular mortality in normotensive and hypertensive adults, suggesting that sodium restriction may be an ineffective strategy for disease prevention. Further evidence points to the importance of balancing sodium and potassium intake, a balance commonly achieved with a healthier diet containing greater quantities of fruits and vegetables. The purpose of this article is to highlight dietary strategies that may prove to be more effective in reducing cardiovascular disease risk. Limitations of current methods used to estimate nutrient intake are described as they relate to this topic. Further research is needed to advance understanding of various aspects of dietary intake that are health protective and allow for the development of more effective public education strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Lifestyle MedicineSame topicSodium Intake and HealthFrench-language works237,207