Translating Cardiovascular Clinical Practice Guidelines on Nutrition Therapy: Validation of the Portfolio Diet Toolkit for Healthcare Providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a leading cause of death in Canada. Although the Portfolio Diet, a dietary pattern of cholesterol-lowering foods, is supported by CVD clinical practice guidelines, its uptake in clinical practice remains limited. This study assessed the content and face validity of a healthcare provider (HCP)-facing toolkit (infographic and video), designed to support implementation of the Portfolio Diet. Methods: HCPs were recruited for a 2-round evaluation. They assessed the toolkit using a questionnaire. Content validity of the infographic was assessed using a 4-point Likert scale (1 = irrelevant to 4 = extremely relevant) and face validity of the infographic and video was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Content-validity indices (CVIs) and face-validity indices (FVIs) were calculated, with ≥ 0.70/1.0 indicating validity. Qualitative feedback informed revisions made between rounds. Results: = 0.89). Conclusions: The toolkit demonstrated strong content and face validity. Repeated assessments and refinement guided by end-user feedback enhanced the toolkit, supporting HCPs in implementing the Portfolio Diet for CVD prevention and management in practice. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05915455.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".