MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385405948 · doi:10.1097/mco.0000000000000972

Composition of healthy diets for older persons

2023· article· en· W4385405948 on OpenAlexaff
Suey S.Y. Yeung, Michelle Kwan, Jean Woo

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVitalityHealthy agingMedicineHealthy foodEnvironmental healthGerontologyHealthy dietHealthy eatingPhysical activityFood scienceBiologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This study aims to review recent evidence (2022-2023) on the role of diet in promoting healthy aging in older adults. RECENT FINDINGS: Current evidence of diet and healthy aging is limited to epidemiological studies. A healthy diet is beneficial for individual domains of intrinsic capacity, that is, cognition, locomotion, vitality, psychological, and/or sensory functions, with sex-specific differences reported. Only a few studies used the multidimensional concept of intrinsic capacity as an outcome. This review supports that a healthy diet for older adults consists of plenty of plant-based foods, adequate protein-rich foods, and healthy fats. Next to quantity, improving the quality and variety within food groups play a role in optimizing health. Data on the associations between adherence to national food-based dietary guidelines and intrinsic capacity are scarce. SUMMARY: A healthy diet, centered on plant-based foods, adequate protein-rich foods and healthy fats, potentially promotes healthy aging. Future studies may evaluate the association between adherence to healthy dietary patterns (particularly national food-based dietary guidelines) and the multidimensional concept of intrinsic capacity, with consideration of sex-specific differences. Clinical trials are warranted to inform the causal effects of diet and outcomes related to intrinsic capacity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic CareSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207