MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045751189 · doi:10.1177/2167696820943028

Diet and Mental Health During Emerging Adulthood: A Systematic Review

2020· review· en· W3045751189 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging Adulthood · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthAnxietyClinical psychologyDepression (economics)PsychologySuicidal ideationSystematic reviewAffect (linguistics)Meta-analysisGrading (engineering)PsychiatryMedicineMEDLINESuicide preventionPoison controlEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research has reported associations between diet and risk of depression and anxiety; however, this is underexplored in emerging adulthood (EA; 18–29 years). This systematic review examined associations between diet quality and common mental disorders and their related symptomatology in the published EA literature. A systematic search according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was conducted for articles published between 2009 and 2019. Grading of evidence was performed using an established quality assessment tool for quantitative studies. Sixteen studies were included for review. Findings supported EA as a risk period for both poor mental health and low diet quality. There was moderate support for associations between diet quality and depression, anxiety, positive/negative affect, suicide ideation, and psychological health. Methodological quality overall was weak. EA appears to be a critical period for both diet quality and mental health. Further research is needed to better understand diet and mental health associations among EAs.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.312 · 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