MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390908213 · doi:10.3233/jpd-230264

The Role of Diet in Parkinson’s Disease

2024· review· en· W4390908213 on OpenAlexafffund
Kira Tosefsky, Julie Zhu, Yolanda N. Wang, Joyce S. T. Lam, Amanda Cammalleri, Silke Appel‐Cresswell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parkinson s Disease · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersParkinson Canada
KeywordsMediterranean dietDiseaseParkinson's diseaseMedicineFood groupDASH dietKetogenic dietPsychological interventionDashIntervention (counseling)Vegan DietEnvironmental healthGerontologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this review is to examine the intersection of Parkinson's disease (PD) with nutrition, to identify best nutritional practices based on current evidence, and to identify gaps in the evidence and suggest future directions. Epidemiological work has linked various dietary patterns and food groups to changes in PD risk; however, fewer studies have evaluated the role of various diets, dietary components, and supplements in the management of established PD. There is substantial interest in exploring the role of diet-related interventions in both symptomatic management and potential disease modification. In this paper, we evaluate the utility of several dietary patterns, including the Mediterranean (MeDi), Mediterranean-DASH Intervention for Neurodegenerative Delay (MIND), Alternative Healthy Eating Index (AHEI), vegan/vegetarian, and ketogenic diet in persons with PD. Additionally, we provide an overview of the evidence relating several individual food groups and nutritional supplements to PD risk, symptoms and progression.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations33
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Parkinson s DiseaseSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207