International consensus on fasting terminology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although fasting is increasingly applied for disease prevention and treatment, consensus on terminology is lacking. Using Delphi methodology, an international, multidisciplinary panel of researchers and clinicians standardized definitions of various fasting approaches in humans. Five online surveys and a live online conference were conducted with 38 experts, 25 of whom completed all 5 surveys. Consensus was achieved for the following terms: "fasting" (voluntary abstinence from some or all foods or foods and beverages), "modified fasting" (restriction of energy intake to max. 25% of energy needs), "fluid-only fasting," "alternate-day fasting," "short-term fasting" (lasting 2-3 days), "prolonged fasting" (≥4 consecutive days), and "religious fasting." "Intermittent fasting" (repetitive fasting periods lasting ≤48 h), "time-restricted eating," and "fasting-mimicking diet" were discussed most. This study provides expert recommendations on fasting terminology for future research and clinical applications, facilitating communication and cross-referencing in the field.
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 | 0.152 | 0.158 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".