Cross-Sectional Analysis of Overall Dietary Intake and Mediterranean Dietary Pattern in Patient’s with Crohn’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to (a) compare macro- and micronutrient intakes between male and female CD patients (b) compare micronutrient intakes of CD patients to a representative population of healthy individuals, and; (c) describe Mediterranean diet scores (P-MDS) of male and female CD patients in remission recruited from an IBD clinic in Calgary, AB. Consecutive patients with ileal and/or colonic CD in endoscopic remission were recruited for participation in this cross-sectional study. Sixty-seven patients were enrolled, with a mean age of 45, and a BMI ≥ 25. Compared with the healthy population, patients with CD had similar energy, protein, carbohydrate and total fat intake. However, PUFA, omega-6 and 3 and MUFA were lower in CD patients and dietary fibre intake was higher. Vitamins C, D, thiamin, niacin, magnesium, phosphorus, zinc and potassium were all significantly lower in all CD patients compared to a healthy population. Few patients with CD met P-MDS criteria for olive oil, vegetable, legumes, and fish intake or consuming Sofrito sauce (mean 4.5, SD=1.1 in males and 4.7, SD=1.8 in females). Patients with CD in remission have suboptimal dietary intakes and patterns and targeted dietary interventions may be beneficial in this population to improve intake.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".