Plant-Based and Plant-Predominant Diets Among Healthcare Students: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic review explores the effects of vegetarian diets on the physical and mental well-being of health sciences students, a demographic known for high academic and psychological stress. We conducted a comprehensive search across major databases, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and identified 22 relevant studies. Our findings suggest that vegetarian diets are associated with lower incidences of chronic diseases such as coronary heart disease and obesity and promote better cardiovascular and metabolic health outcomes compared to non-vegetarian diets. Notably, vegetarian students could display lower systolic blood pressure and waist circumferences. Contrary to the positive physical health outcomes, the review presents mixed results concerning the mental health impacts, with some studies indicating no significant effects and others suggesting potential risks for increased anxiety and disordered eating behaviors. The review underscores the need for further research into the nuanced impacts of vegetarian diets on this specific population, suggesting that while the physical health benefits are evident, the psychological effects require deeper investigation to fully understand their scope and mechanisms.
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 | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".