MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131783466 · doi:10.3390/nu13020692

Nutrient Requirements during Pregnancy and Lactation

2021· review· en· W3131783466 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marie Jouanne, Sarah Oddoux, Antoine Noël, Anne Sophie Voisin‐Chiret

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPregnancyMicronutrientBreastfeedingLactationMedicineEnvironmental healthNutrientBiologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A woman's nutritional status during pregnancy and breastfeeding is not only critical for her health, but also for that of future generations. Nutritional requirements during pregnancy differ considerably from those of non-pregnant women. Thus, a personalized approach to nutritional advice is recommended. Currently, some countries recommend routine supplementation for all pregnant women, while others recommend supplements only when necessary. Maternal physiological adaptations, as well as nutritional requirements during pregnancy and lactation, will be reviewed in the literature examining the impacts of dietary changes. All of these data have been studied deeply to facilitate a discussion on dietary supplement use and the recommended doses of nutrients during pregnancy and lactation. The aim of this review is to evaluate the knowledge in the scientific literature on the current recommendations for the intake of the most common micronutrients and omega-3 fatty acids during pregnancy and lactation in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Taking into account these considerations, we examine minerals, vitamins, and omega-3 fatty acid requirements. Finally, we conclude by discussing the potential benefits of each form of supplementation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations185
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207