Nutrition counselling for at-risk infants and toddlers in an Old Order Amish community in southwestern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the Growing Babies Project 1 (GBP1), high rates of failure to thrive (FTT) (34%), stunting (21%), and wasting (21%) were documented in Old Order Amish infants and toddlers based on the Center for Disease Control (CDC) growth references. A follow-up study (GBP2) provided mothers with personal nutrition counselling and dietary intervention for their children every 3 months from 6 to 18 months of age. Compared to GBP1, FTT increased to 48%, stunting and wasting decreased to 16% and 19%, respectively. However, comparison of growth measurements to 2006 World Health Organization growth standards indicated that FTT decreased to just 6%. This suggests that the CDC growth charts were not appropriate for assessing growth status in these children. High prevalence of inadequate dietary intakes were noted for vitamins D and E, folate and zinc. Overall, the mothers found the GBP2 project useful in understanding their children's growth and development.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".