Co-Development of Three Dietary Indices to Facilitate Dietary Intake Assessment of Pediatric Crohn’s Disease Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literature on dietary behaviours of the pediatric Crohn’s Disease (CD) population and the relationship between dietary intake and CD activity is limited. Three dietary indices were developed and tested to conduct dietary pattern analysis in pediatric patients with CD consuming a free diet following remission induction via exclusive enteral nutrition (n = 11). Index scores underwent descriptive and inferential analysis. The mean adjusted scores (out of 100) for the Pediatric Western Diet Index, Pediatric Prudent Diet Index, and Pediatric-Adapted 2010 Alternate Healthy Eating Index (PA2010-AHEI) were 29.82 ± 15.22, 34.25 ± 15.18, and 51.50 ± 11.69, respectively. The mean Western-to-Prudent ratio was 0.94 ± 0.55. A significant correlation (r = −0.71) and relationship (F[1, 9] = 9.04, P < 0.05, R2 = 0.501) between the Western-to-Prudent ratio and PA2010-AHEI was found. The results suggest participants were not following a Western or Prudent diet, and were consuming foods not captured by the indices. More research is needed to describe dietary intake of individuals with CD, validate dietary indices in diverse samples, and explore the utility of these indices in CD assessment and treatment. The co-authors hope this work will stimulate/inspire subsequent interprofessional, dietitian-led research on this topic.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".