MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029158925 · doi:10.1093/cdn/nzaa054_143

Do French-Canadian Women Planning a Pregnancy Have a Healthy Diet?

2020· article· en· W3029158925 on OpenAlexaffabout
Claudia Savard, Anne-Sophie Plante, Marianne Gagnon, Julie Robitaille, Simone Lemieux, Anne‐Sophie Morisset

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivitaminMedicineBody mass indexDemographyPregnancyPopulationGerontologyGynecologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineVitamin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since very few studies investigated dietary habits in women planning to conceive, we aimed to assess the diet quality and supplement use in a population of women who are planning a pregnancy in the following year. One hundred sixty-five (165) women trying to become pregnant were enrolled via e-mails in a Web-based study. All women had to complete various Web questionnaires, including three 24 h Web dietary recalls (R24W), from which the Canadian Healthy Eating Index (C-HEI 2007) was calculated. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated using the self-reported weight and height of participants. Information on supplement use and sociodemographic variables were obtained through other Web questionnaires. Women were aged 30.9 ± 4.3 years on average and had a mean BMI of 24.3 ± 4.8 kg/m2. Most women were Caucasian (92.7%), had a university degree (72.1%) and an annual household income of CAD$80,000 or more (60.0%). Almost two thirds of the women reported taking a multivitamin (33.9%) or a folic acid supplement (30.9%), meaning that more than a third of the women (35.2%) did not take either. The mean C-HEI score was 61.8 ± 12.7 out of 100 (range: 17.2–91.4) and only 13 women (7.9%) had a score higher than 80, which represents a diet of good quality. Most women (74.5%) fell into the «diet requiring improvement» category (HEI score between 50 and 80). Diet quality scores were higher in women aged 28 years and older (vs <28 years, P = 0.03), who had more than a high school degree (vs only a high school degree, P = 0.01) and who reported taking a multivitamin or a folic acid supplement (vs taking neither, P = 0.009). C-HEI scores showed that diet quality could be improved among women trying to become pregnant, specifically in younger and less educated women. More than a third of the women did not take a prenatal multivitamin or folic acid supplement even though a folic acid supplement is recommended for women planning to conceive. Considering the importance of diet quality and sufficient folic acid intake during preconception and pregnancy, it could be relevant to assess the knowledge of nutritional recommendations in women planning a pregnancy. This project is funded by start-up funds from the CHU de Québec-UL research centre (FRQ-S and the CHU de Québec Foundation).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Developments in NutritionSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207