MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281486842 · doi:10.1007/s00394-022-02915-x

Women’s health: optimal nutrition throughout the lifecycle

2022· article· en· W4281486842 on OpenAlexaff
Edith J. M. Feskens, Regan L Bailey, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Hans Konrad Biesalski, Heather A. Eicher‐Miller, Klaus Krämer, Wen‐Harn Pan, James C. Griffiths

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Nutrition · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionOverconsumptionMedicineMalnutritionBusinessEnvironmental healthGerontologyNursingProduction (economics)Economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sex differences are an important consideration when researching and establishing policies for nutrition and optimal health. For women's health, there are important physiologic, neurologic, and hormonal distinctions throughout the lifecycle that impact nutritional needs. Distinct from those for men, these nutritional needs must be translated into appropriate nutrition policy that aims to not only avoid overt nutritional deficiency, but also to promote health and minimize risk for chronic disease. Through a series of webinars, scientific experts discussed the advances in the understanding of the unique nutritional needs, challenges and opportunities of the various life stages for women across the life course and identified emerging nutritional interventions that may be beneficial for women. Nevertheless, there is concern that existing nutrition policy intended for women's health is falling short with examples of programs that are focused more on delivering calories than achieving optimal nutrition. To be locally effective, targeted nutrition needs to offer different proposals for different cultural, socio-economic, and geographic communities, and needs to be applicable at all stages of growth and development. There must be adequate access to nutritious foods, and the information to understand and implement proven nutritional opportunities. Experts provided recommendations for improvement of current entitlement programs that will address accessibility and other social and environmental issues to support women properly throughout the lifecycle.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NutritionSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207