MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098620288

Article Vegetable and Fruit Intakes of On-Reserve First Nations Schoolchildren Compared to Canadian Averages and Current Recommendations

2012· article· en· W7098620288 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytochemistry and Biological Activities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverweightObesityBody mass indexNutrientFood groupCurrent (fluid)Dietary Reference IntakeVitamin
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This study investigated, in on-reserve First Nations (FN) youth in Ontario, Canada, the following: (a) the intakes of vegetable and fruit, “other ” foods and relevant nutrients as compared to current recommendations and national averages, (b) current prevalence rates of overweight and obesity and (c) the relationship between latitude and dietary intakes. Twenty-four-hour diet recalls were collected via the Waterloo Web-Based Eating Behaviour Questionnaire (WEB-Q) (n = 443). Heights and weights of participants were self reported using measured values and Body Mass Index was categorized using the International Obesity Task Force cutoffs. Food group and nutrient intakes were compared to current standards, Southern Ontario Food Behaviour data and the Canadian Community Health Survey, Cycle 2.2, using descriptive statistics. Mean vegetable and fruit, fibre and folate intakes were less than current recommendations. Girls aged 14–18 years had mean intakes of vitamin A below current recommendations for this sub-group; for all sub-groups, mean intakes of vegetables and fruit were below Canadian averages. All sub-groups also

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhytochemistry and Biological ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207