MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6958807911 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.9751061

Additional file 1: of Consumption of low nutritive value foods and cardiometabolic risk factors among French-speaking adults from Quebec, Canada: the PREDISE study

2019· article· en· W6958807911 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPasture and Agricultural Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalorieTable (database)Consumption (sociology)Value (mathematics)ObesityEstimationAdded sugarNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Table S1. Classification of some foods high in saturated fats, sugar or sodium in the R24W using the Health Canada Surveillance Tool Tier System. Table S2. Examples of calories from low nutritive value foods in mixed dishes as calculated in the R24W. Table S3. Estimation of standard deviation stratified by BMI, sex and age group among participants that came for clinical assessment. Table S4. Median intakes of low nutritive value foods among 1147 French-speaking adults from 5 administrative regions of the Province of Quebec, Canada. Table S5. “Naive” associations between incremental consumption of 250 cal from low nutritive value foods and cardiometabolic risk markers. Table S6. “Naive” associations between incremental consumption of 10% of total energy intakes from low nutritive value foods and cardiometabolic risk markers. Table S7. Associations between incremental consumption of 250 cal from low nutritive value foods and cardiometabolic risk markers, stratified by median Canadian Healthy Eating Index scores. Figure S1. Proportion of total energy intake provided by the main sources of low nutritive value foods according to sociodemographic characteristics. (PDF 337 kb)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5660.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.164 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicPasture and Agricultural SystemsFrench-language works237,207