Predictive equation derived from 6,497 doubly labelled water measurements enables the detection of erroneous self-reported energy intake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nutritional epidemiology aims to link dietary exposures to chronic disease, but the instruments for evaluating dietary intake are inaccurate. One way to identify unreliable data and the sources of errors is to compare estimated intakes with the total energy expenditure (TEE). In this study, we used the International Atomic Energy Agency Doubly Labeled Water Database to derive a predictive equation for TEE using 6,497 measures of TEE in individuals aged 4 to 96 years. The resultant regression equation predicts expected TEE from easily acquired variables, such as body weight, age and sex, with 95% predictive limits that can be used to screen for misreporting by participants in dietary studies. We applied the equation to two large datasets (National Diet and Nutrition Survey and National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) and found that the level of misreporting was >50%. The macronutrient composition from dietary reports in these studies was systematically biased as the level of misreporting increased, leading to potentially spurious associations between diet components and body mass index.
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 | 0.007 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".