MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396238029 · doi:10.3390/nu16091312

Expanding Fortification with Folic Acid: Thinking Outside the Cereal-Grain Box

2024· article· en· W4396238029 on OpenAlexaff
Becky L. Tsang, Carlen Stadnik, Michelle Duong, Helena Pachón, Homero Martı́nez

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsNutrition International
FundersEmory UniversityBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsFortificationFolic acidWhole grainsCereal grainFood scienceMedicineChemistryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(1) Background: Fortifying maize and wheat flours with folic acid has effectively reduced neural tube defect-affected births. However, maize and wheat flours may not be widely consumed in all countries; further reduction in neural tube defect-affected births could benefit from the identification of alternative food vehicles. We aimed to use dietary intake or apparent consumption data to determine alternative food vehicles for large-scale fortification with folic acid in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LILMICs) and identify current research related to examining the technological feasibility of fortifying alternative foods with folic acid. (2) Methods: We identified 81 LILMICs, defined by the World Bank’s (WB) 2018 income classifications. To identify dietary intake or apparent consumption, we reviewed WB’s Microdata Library and Global Health Data Exchange for national surveys from 1997–2018. We reviewed survey reports for dietary intake or apparent consumption data and analyzed survey datasets for population coverage of foods. We defined alternative food vehicles as those that may cover/be consumed by ≥30% of the population or households; cereal grains (maize and wheat flours and rice) were included as an alternative food vehicle if a country did not have existing mandatory fortification legislation. To identify current research on fortification with folic acid in foods other than cereal grains, we conducted a systematic review of published literature and unpublished theses, and screened for foods or food products. (3) Results: We extracted or analyzed data from 18 national surveys and countries. The alternative foods most represented in the surveys were oil (n = 16), sugar (n = 16), and salt (n = 14). The coverage of oil ranged from 33.2 to 95.7%, sugar from 32.2 to 98.4%, and salt from 49.8 to 99.9%. We found 34 eligible studies describing research on alternative foods. The most studied alternative foods for fortification with folic acid were dairy products (n = 10), salt (n = 6), and various fruit juices (n = 5). (4) Conclusions: Because of their high coverage, oil, sugar, and salt emerge as potential alternative foods for large-scale fortification with folic acid. However, except for salt, there are limited or no studies examining the technological feasibility of fortifying these foods with folic acid.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicFolate and B Vitamins ResearchFrench-language works237,207