Social network characteristics are correlated with dietary patterns among middle aged and older South Asians living in the United States (U.S.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Social and cultural norms, operating through social networks, may influence an individual’s dietary choices. We examined correlations between social network characteristics and dietary patterns among South Asians in the United States (U.S.) Methods Data from the Mediators of Atherosclerosis in South Asians Living in America (MASALA) Social Network study were analyzed among 756 participants (mean age = 59 y standard deviation [SD] = 9 y; 44% women). A culturally adapted, validated food frequency questionnaire was used for dietary assessment. A posteriori dietary patterns using principal component analysis were named 1) animal protein, 2) fried snacks, sweets and high-fat dairy, and 3) fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes. Social network characteristics were assessed using a standard egocentric approach, where participants (egos) self-reported data on perceived dietary habits of their network members. Partial correlations between social network characteristics and egos’ dietary patterns were examined. Results The mean social network size of egos was 4.2 (SD = 1.1), with high proportion of network members being family (72%), South Asian ethnicity (89%), and half having daily contact. Animal protein pattern scores were negatively correlated with fruits and cooked vegetables consumption of network. Fried snacks, sweets and high-fat dairy pattern scores were positively correlated with sugar-sweetened beverages, South Asian sweets, fried/fast foods and ghee (clarified butter) consumption of network. Fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes pattern scores were positively correlated with vegetables, fruits, and brown rice/quinoa consumption of network. Conclusions Network member characteristics and their perceived dietary behaviors were correlated with dietary patterns of egos. Dietary intervention studies among South Asians should consider social network characteristics as candidate components for dietary intervention.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".