From bytes to bites: application of large language models to enhance nutritional recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT are increasingly positioned to be integrated into various aspects of daily life, with promising applications in healthcare, including personalized nutritional guidance for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, for LLM-powered nutrition support tools to reach their full potential, active collaboration of healthcare professionals, patients, caregivers and LLM experts is crucial. We conducted a comprehensive review of the literature on the use of LLMs as tools to enhance nutrition recommendations for patients with CKD, curated by our expertise in the field. Additionally, we considered relevant findings from adjacent fields, including diabetes and obesity management. Currently, the application of LLMs for CKD-specific nutrition support remains limited and has room for improvement. Although LLMs can generate recipe ideas, their nutritional analyses often underestimate critical food components such as electrolytes and calories. Anticipated advancements in LLMs and other generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are expected to enhance these capabilities, potentially enabling accurate nutritional analysis, the generation of visual aids for cooking and identification of kidney-healthy options in restaurants. While LLM-based nutritional support for patients with CKD is still in its early stages, rapid advancements are expected in the near future. Engagement from the CKD community, including healthcare professionals, patients and caregivers, will be essential to harness AI-driven improvements in nutritional care with a balanced perspective that is both critical and optimistic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".