Contribution of flavoured milk on dietary intakes and its association with body mass index percentile in children at high risk of overweight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To compare children's dietary intake and body mass index percentile (BMI%ile) between those who did and did not consume flavored milk (FM). In the Québec Adiposity and Lifestyle Investigation in Youth (QUALITY) study (2005–2008), 632 Caucasian children aged 8–10 years (with at least one obese parent) were recruited. Assessment of FM, sugar sweetened beverage (SSB) and nutrient intakes was based on three 24‐hour recalls. Height and weight were measured for calculating BMI%ile. Physical activity was scaled using 7‐day accelerometer. Time spent in the sedentary behavior was collected using standard questionnaire. The percentage of overweight children was 41.9%. FM drinkers (N = 90) consumed 132g/d FM per day and had a higher mean intake for calcium (930 vs. 837 mg; P = 0.010), Vitamin D (6.9 vs. 5.9 μg; P = 0.021) and total sugar (99 g vs. 90 g, P = 0.015) than non‐FM drinkers (N = 521). These differences remained significant after adjustment for total energy intake. In multivariate analysis controlling for physical activity, sedentary behavior and SSB intake, FM consumption was not associated with BMI%ile. FM consumption was not associated with BMI%ile despite higher sugar intake and FM provided higher levels of calcium and Vitamin D intake. Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, Fonds de la recherche en santé du Québec and Dairy Farmers of Canada
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".