MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237966631 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy009.171

A171 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE DIETITIAN INTEGRATED EVALUATION TOOL FOR GLUTEN-FREE DIETS (DIET-GFD)

2018· article· en· W4237966631 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amporn Atsawarungruangkit, J Silvester, Dayna Weiten, Kendal L Green, K Wilkey, Lisa Rigaux, C N Bernstein, Lesley A. Graff, John R. Walker, D Duerksen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaSt. Boniface HospitalVictoria General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGluten freeGlutenMedicineFood scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Celiac disease (CD) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by small intestinal villous damage that recovers with a gluten-free diet (GFD). A consultation with a skilled dietitian is the clinical gold standard for monitoring GFD adherence. Yet, there is no standardized tool for dietitians to objectively grade GFD adherence. To develop a standardized tool to evaluate GFD adherence that can be used by dietitians. Participants were recruited from the Manitoba Celiac Disease Cohort, a prospective inception cohort of confirmed CD based on elevated TTG and/or EMA antibodies and Marsh III histology. Using a consensus process, an expert panel of gastroenterologists, dietitians with expertise in GFDs, clinical health psychologists and persons with CD developed the DIET-GFD. Two dietitians then performed duplicate assessments of 27 newly diagnosed participants who had been advised to follow a GFD. The global adherence scale was further revised following panel discussions of the cases where the dietitian ratings were discordant or they were uncertain which rating to apply. The scoring system was then validated using duplicate assessments of additional 37 CD participants. Interrater agreement between the two dietitians was assessed using square-weight Cohen’s kappa. The DIET-GFD includes features related to frequency and quantity of gluten ingestion based upon self-report and food frequency evaluation, shopping and dining habits, how and where food is prepared and consumed, eating behaviors, and label reading skills. The DIET-GFD global assessment is reported using a 10-point ordinal descriptive scale ranging from 1 (takes few precautions and regularly eats gluten) to 10 (no gluten in kitchen and rarely eats food prepared outside the home). The validation study included 38 study visits (n = 38) involving 37 participants. The kappa of DIET-GFD global assessment was 0.845 (almost perfect agreement). DIET-GFD is a useful tool for dietitians to evaluate GFD adherence. Given a high level of agreement between two expert dietitians, further studies are needed to confirm that the score from DIET-GFD is reliable across institutions and cultures as well as dietitians who do not have GFD expertise. CAG, CIHRNational Institutes of Health (NIH)

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207