Characterising nutritional composition and labelling of packaged infant foods in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This cross-sectional study evaluated the nutritional composition and labelling of commercial foods in Canada targeted to infants up to 18 months of age. Front-of-package labelling requirements were assessed based on daily values identified by Health Canada for saturated fatty acids, sugars, and sodium for children aged one year and older. Infant commercial food products were identified from online and in-person records of retailers across Canada. A total of 1,010 products were identified. Products aimed at older infants (12–18 months) contained significantly more calories, macronutrients, sugars, saturated fat, and trans fat compared to those targeted at younger infants (<12 months). In addition, 40% of products for children aged 12–18 months required a ‘high in sugar’ front-of-package label, while less required a ‘high in saturated fats’ (13%) and ‘high in sodium’ (5%) label. Organic products had higher added sugar and fibre, while they were lower in calories, total fat, saturated fat, and protein. Plant-based products, including vegetarian/vegan products, contained fewer calories, fat, saturated fat, trans fat, and protein, but more fibre. Gluten-containing products had more calories, macronutrients, sugar, fibre, and saturated fat. Non-GMO labelled products had more calories, carbohydrates, and sugar, but less saturated fat. Significant differences were observed for vitamins and minerals across food categories (p < 0.05). Our findings offer valuable guidance for parents, caregivers, and healthcare professionals on infant nutrition, highlighting the importance of selecting foods that align with infants’ specific dietary needs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".