MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392343749 · doi:10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.102130

Development of a Database for the Estimation of Heme Iron and Nonheme Iron Content of Animal-Based Foods

2024· article· en· W4392343749 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIron Metabolism and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesUniversity of AlbertaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchChildren's Health Research InstituteWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChonnam National University
KeywordsFood scienceBioavailabilityDietary ironChemistryShrimpRaw materialRaw meatDatabaseAnimal scienceIron deficiencyBiologyMedicineAnemiaComputer scienceBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Total iron (TI) intake and differentiation between heme iron (HI) and nonheme iron (NHI) are uncommon despite markedly different bioavailability. Objectives: To create a database compiling information from studies that directly assessed the HI content of animal products using the Hornsey method, and to explore differences in estimates of HI intake between the data compiled and the Monsen method. Methods: A literature search identified studies that chemically characterized the HI content of animal-based foods using the Hornsey method; HI, NHI, and TI contents (mg/100 g) were compiled. Information was grouped by animal type and cooking method, and mean (± SD) HI% was calculated. Using a 24-h dietary record, differences in HI and NHI intake using the compiled information and the Monsen approach were explored. Results: Actual HI% values ranged from 7% to 94%. Raw foods had the highest HI% [raw duck (94% ± 4%), raw blood curd (82% ± 4%), and raw beef (79% ± 9%)]. Boiled foods had the lowest HI% [boiled shrimp (11% ± 5%) and meatballs (15% ± 6%)]. Cooked foods with the highest HI% were beef (70% ± 10%) and lamb (70% ± 9%). In many instances, applying actual HI% from the complied database produced markedly different measures of the HI content of foods [cooked beef (Monsen: 1.3 mg/100 g); (Hornsey: 2.3 mg/100 g)]. Estimation of iron intake in a 24-h recall demonstrated that using animal-specific HI% results in different estimates of HI intake [Monsen: 1.2 mg HI (40%); Hornsey: 1.8 mg HI (59%)]. Conclusions: Animal-based foods have variable HI%. A fixed HI:NHI ratio does not reflect this variation and could give rise to inaccurate estimates of HI content in food and HI intake. Consideration of this variation in HI% may improve our ability to link dietary intake with iron status and important health outcomes.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.765
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.269 · 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