MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Restaurant meals ‐ almost a full day's worth of calories, fats and sodium

2013· article· en· W3170755134 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mary J. Scourboutakos, Mary R. L’Abbé

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalorieMealSaturated fatFood scienceTrans fatAnimal scienceSodiumMedicineCholesterolChemistryBiologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective was to systematically analyze the nutritional profile (calories, fat, saturated fat, trans fat, sodium and cholesterol) of meals from chain sit‐down/family style restaurants. Using the “U of T Restaurant Database”, the nutritional profile of 3507 meals from 19 restaurants was calculated and analyzed. This included all potential meal combinations from restaurants that provided nutrition information online and had 10 or more locations nationally. On average, breakfast, lunch and dinner meals contained: 1129 calories (56% of the average daily 2000 calorie recommendation), 151% of the amount of sodium an adult should consume in a single day (2263 mg), 89% of the recommended daily fat intake level (58 g), 83% of the recommended daily saturated and trans fat intake level (16 g saturated fat and 0.6 g trans fat) and 60% of the daily value for cholesterol (179 mg). More than 80% of meals exceeded the daily recommended intake level for sodium (1500mg). Only 1% of meals had less than 600 mg of sodium, the “healthy level” for meals, according to the FDA. Meals identified by the restaurants as being “healthy” contained on average 474 calories, 13 g of fat (20% DV), 3 g of saturated fat (17% DV) and 752 mg of sodium (50% AI). These data demonstrate that addressing the nutritional profile of restaurant meals should be a major public health priority. Grant Funding Source : MS: CIHR/PICDP Fellowship, Ontario Graduate Scholarship, ML: U of T McHenry Grant, Canadian Stroke Network

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
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)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicNutritional Studies and Diet→French-language works237,207→