Mediterranean Diet and cardiovascular health: an historical perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first investigation of dietary intake in the Mediterranean region was undertaken at the initiative of the government of Greece in 1948. Plant foods (cereals, pulses, nuts, potatoes, vegetables and fruits) accounted for 61 % of total energy intake (TEI), animal foods (meat, eggs, fish and dairy products) for 7 % of TEI and olive oil was the main oil used. In 1950s, Ancel Keys undertook studies in USA, Italy, Spain, England, Japan, Australia and Canada leading him to hypothesise that a link could exist between diet, plasma cholesterol and CHD. Between 1958 and 1964, Keys and co-workers carried out the Seven Countries Study, which enrolled men aged 40-59 years in one of sixteen cohorts from seven countries (Finland, Greece, Italy, Yugoslavia, Japan, USA and Italy). After 15-, 25- and 50-year follow-up, a strong positive relation was observed between saturated fat intake and CHD mortality, and a negative one with Mediterranean Dietary Index. In 1975, Keys and his wife published a book entitled: 'How to eat well and stay well. The Mediterranean way', which popularised Mediterranean Diet (MedDiet). After 45-year follow-up, longevity without CHD death was 12·9 years higher in Crete than in Finland. Protecting effect of MedDiet towards CHD incidence and risk is now confirmed by Prevencion con Dieta Mediterranea study and by cohorts' studies gathered in several recent meta-analyses. MedDiet is sustainable and recognised by UNESCO as an intangible cultural heritage, which is the most beautiful homage that can be paid to Ancel Keys and all his co-workers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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".