MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Energy-Dense and Low-Fiber Dietary Pattern May Explain the Increasing Obesity Prevalence in Adults in Brazil: An Analysis of the 2017–2018 National Dietary Survey

2024· preprint· en· W4400009108 on OpenAlexaff
Iuna Arruda Alves, Mahsa Jessri, Luana Silva Monteiro, Luiz E. S. Gomes, Taís de Souza Lopes, Edna Massae Yokoo, Rosely Sichieri, Rosângela Alves Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDietary fiberObesityEnvironmental healthEnergy (signal processing)GerontologyMedicineGeographyFood scienceStatisticsEndocrinologyMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid methods are a suitable option to extract dietary patterns associated with health outcomes. This study aimed to identify dietary patterns of Brazilian adults (20-59 years old; n=28,153) related to dietary components associated with the risk of obesity. Data from the 2017-2018 Brazilian National Dietary Survey were analyzed. Food consumption was obtained through 24-hour recall. Dietary patterns were extracted using partial least squares regression. The selected response variables were energy density (ED), percentage of total fat (%TF), and fiber density (FD). In addition, 32 food groups were established as predictor variables. The first dietary pattern, named as energy-dense and low-fiber (ED-LF), included with positive factor loadings: solid fats, breads, added-sugar beverages, fast foods, sauces, pasta, and cheeses, and with negative factor loadings: rice, beans, vegetables, water, and fruits. Higher adherence to the ED-LF dietary pattern was observed for individuals >40 years old, from urban areas, in the highest income level, who were not on a diet, reporting away-from-home food consumption, and having ≥1 snack/day. Eating patterns with similar characteristics are often associated with an increased risk of obesity. The results are consistent with recommendations to increase the consumption of fresh foods and to reduce ultra-processed products.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207