MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175838119 · doi:10.3390/children8070536

Association between Overweight and Diet Diversity Score: A Cross-Sectional Study Conducted among Tunisian Children

2021· article· en· W3175838119 on OpenAlexaff
Darine Dogui, Radhouene Doggui, Jalila El Ati, Myriam El Ati‐Hellal

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MonctonUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverweightAnthropometryMedicineCross-sectional studyLogistic regressionEnvironmental healthDemographyObesityPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: This study explored the association between the diet diversity score (DDS) and overweight among Tunisian children. Methods: A representative sample of children living in Greater Tunis was selected based on a two-stage clustered sampling design. A total of 1200 children (3–9 years) were recruited. Dietary assessment was realized using a 24 h dietary recall. Anthropometric measurements were realized, and overweight was defined according to the World Health Organization standards. Logistic regression was used for the association between DDS with overweight. Results: A quarter of children were found to be overweight. Overweight prevalence was found to decrease with the increase of mother education level (p = 0.010) among children <6 years. Crude DDS score was higher among non-overweight children irrespective of the age class (p = 0.002). Tunisian children appeared to consume much more than six food groups, corresponding to a more than recommended intake of most nutrients. Intriguingly, DDS was positively associated with the occurrence of overweight children <6 years, adjusted odd ratio = 1.37, 95% CI (1.03–1.82). Conclusion: Overweight is a public health problem among Tunisian children. A high DDS signifies adequate nutrient intake. An increase of DDS was found to be a positive predictor of overweight only in pre-school children.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildrenSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207