Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bonjour! Welcome to Québec City, the capital of the province of Québec. This historic city was the host of the 2015 Dietitians of Canada Annual Conference. The submissions for this year's Canadian Foundation for Dietetic Research event represented the diversity of dietetic research conducted within Canada. Through the support of Dietitians of Canada and the Canadian Foundation for Dietetic Research, the 2015 event was both an exciting and informative exchange of research and experience-sharing efforts that inspired attendees. The topics highlighted from this year's abstracts include Community-Based Nutritional Care, Wellness and Public Health–Children, Determinants of Food Choice, Dietary Intake, Nutrition Health and Education, Dietetic Practice and Education, Clinical Research and Patient Service, Nutrition Social Media and the Web, Nutrition Labelling and Patient Services. Each presenter provided an 11 minute oral presentation (8 minutes for presenting and 3 minutes for questions). This allowed for meaningful interaction between the presenters and those attending the sessions. This year we had over 50 presentations. These presentations offer the newest insights into important research findings that you may be able to apply to your own practice. This Research Event would not be possible without the commitment and dedication of many people. On behalf of Dietitians of Canada and the Canadian Foundation for Dietetic Research, I would like to extend a special thank you to the 2015 Abstracts Review Committee who represented research, clinical nutrition, community nutrition, and education: Jennifer Brown (Registered Dietitian, The Ottawa Hospital Weight Management Clinic and Bariatric Surgery Program), Marketa Graham (Public Health Dietitian, Ottawa Public Health Unit), Mahsa Jessri (PhD Candidate, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto), Hélène Lowell (Nutrition Advisor, Health Canada), and Joseph Murphy (Professional Practice Co-ordinator, The Ottawa Hospital). I would also like to thank all of our moderators who took the time during the conference to keep our research presentation sessions on time. A special thank you to Shilpa Mukund and Greg Sarney at the Canadian Foundation for Dietetic Research for their assistance, patience, and support throughout the review process. I enjoyed interacting with many of you at the oral research presentations where we highlighted the findings from our dietetic colleagues across our country. Marcia Cooper, PhD, RD Chair, 2015 Abstracts Review Committee Health 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 | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.623 | 0.381 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".