MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095523745

ASSESSING THE FUNCTIONAL FOODS AND NATURAL HEALTH PRODUCTS INDUSTRY: A COMPARATIVE OVERVIEW

2013· article· en· W7095523745 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth carePublic healthWillingness to payVariety (cybernetics)Public policyFood productsHealth benefitsHuman health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Functional foods and natural health products (NHP) have become a relatively new component of the human diet with important policy implications. Increased consumer interest in healthier food products is driven by a variety of factors including growing awareness of the link between diet and health, the desire to age ‘gracefully ’ by maintaining good health, greater convenience in meeting nutritional needs and preventing chronic diseases such as diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular diseases and respiratory diseases. Consumers are more conscious of the maintenance of good health through diet, thereby gravitating towards foods that offer additional benefits beyond that provided by conventional food and are demonstrating a willingness to pay a premium for these products. Interest amongst policy makers in the functional foods and NHP industry is also increasing, due to rising public health care costs, especially in countries with publicly-funded health care systems such as Canada, increased incidence of chronic and sedentary lifestyle-related diseases, aging populations, new growth opportunities in the food industry, new R&D applications, and an increase in overall income in some countries. Ever increasing health care costs have led governments, health professionals and researchers to examine measures that promote well-being and reduce the risk of disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0160.014
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207