MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097563867 · doi:10.47670/wuwijar202041tv

Malnutrition Intervention in Low Socioeconomic Senior Populations

2020· article· en· W3097563867 on OpenAlexaff
Taryn Vanderberg

Bibliographic record

VenueWestcliff International Journal of Applied Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsWycliffe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalnutritionSocioeconomic statusIntervention (counseling)Environmental healthMedicineGerontologyPopulationNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to identify the effectiveness of malnutrition intervention programs within senior populations. Government subsidized nutrition intervention programs, such as Meals on Wheels, play a vital role in the prevention of malnutrition in lower socioeconomic senior populations in the United States (Roy, 2006). For many older adults, meals received via nutrition programs serve as a lifeline, meeting essential nutritional needs and preventing premature institutionalized care (Lepore, 2019). Sixty-three Meals on Wheels (MOW) participants residing in Southern California were assessed, comparing nutritional status upon program intake against nutritional status after three to six months to identify improvement or decline. This study relied on self-reporting on the part of senior participants to explore the characteristics related to socioeconomic status and nutritional risk, and collect quantitative data. Further, it aimed to highlight whether nutritional risk was decreased through program usage. Access to the MOW nutrition program was found to correlate with a reduction in malnutrition risk among the participants in the study. Through the use of nutrition programs and their evaluations, malnutrition and malnutrition risk may be detected earlier, and subsequent measures for prevention can be employed.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestcliff International Journal of Applied ResearchSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207