MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191134431 · doi:10.1016/j.nutres.2021.07.007

Intake of artificial sweeteners among adults is associated with reduced odds of gastrointestinal luminal cancers: a meta-analysis of cohort and case-control studies

2021· review· en· W3191134431 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Tepler, Gila Hoffman, Shawn Jindal, Neeraj Narula, Shailja C. Shah

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Research · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicBiochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityAmerican Gastroenterological AssociationU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisOdds ratioInternal medicineColorectal cancerCase-control studyCancerPublication biasProspective cohort studyGastroenterologyEsophageal cancerCohort studyOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNutrition ResearchSame topicBiochemical Analysis and Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207