MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2518739038 · doi:10.14288/1.0086494

Evaluation of the effectiveness of an innovative nutrition education program (Foodstyles : K)

2008· article· en· W2518739038 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gail K. Hammond

Notice bibliographique

RevuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueDietetics, Nutrition, and Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedical educationMedicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The nutrition of young children has been recognized as a priority health promotion issue for Canadians by Health and Welfare Canada. Childhood offers an opportunity, unlike any other time in the life cycle, to establish lifelong healthful eating patterns. By providing young children with the necessary tools to attain a basic understanding of nutrition concepts, we are making an investment in their future. Program evaluation is an essential key to obtaining the greatest gains from this investment. The focus of this program evaluation was two-fold. First, Phase I was designed to assess teachers' perceptions of an existing early childhood nutrition education program (Foodstyles:K), with the intention of maximizing the effectiveness of future editions of the program. Second, Phase II was designed to evaluate the impact of this program on student's familiarity with 16 specific foods and their stated willingness to eat them, and to offer parents of the students an opportunity to contribute their perceptions of any effects of the program on their child's food behaviours. A questionnaire was developed and pretested for Phase I to assess teacher use of the program. A return rate of 49% (n=404) was achieved with a maximum of 4 contacts per teacher. Three quarters of the teachers taught the program at some point following attendance at a Foodstyles:K workshop, and 47% of all respondents reported "current" use of the program during the school year which was evaluated (1989-1990). The outstanding reason for non-use of the program was a lack of both in class and out of class time. However, almost 1 out of every 5 teachers who indicated past use of the program, voluntarily commented that the program was "good," "excellent," or "terrific." An interview protocol was developed and pretested for Phase II to assess kindergarten student’s familiarity with the 16 test foods and their stated willingness to eat them. Two questionnaires were also developed (pretest and posttest) to assess parents' perceptions of their children’s willingness to eat the test foods. Several questionnaire items appeared on both the pretest and posttest questionnaires to permit a comparison of parents' responses at the start of the school year and again near the end. In addition, one question which appeared on both the pretest and posttest questionnaires, coincided with the same question asked of the children in terms of their stated willingness to eat the test foods. This permitted a comparison between parental perceptions of their child's willingness to eat the test foods and their child's actual responses. Overall, students familiarity with the 16 test foods increased significantly from pretest to posttest with the most significant increase appearing with foods that were introduced to the group of children who received program intervention. No change was observed overall from pretest to posttest for student's stated willingness to eat the 16 test foods. Comparatively, no significant change was observed for parents' perceptions of their child's willingness to eat the test foods. Significant differences did appear between parents and children in the intervention group for their responses indicating the child's willingness to eat both the introduced and non-introduced foods at pretest and again at posttest, with the child consistently stating s/he was willing to eat a greater number of foods than perceived by her/his parent. With the exception at posttest with non-introduced foods only, there was no significant difference between parents and children in the control group for their responses to the child's willingness to eat the test foods. Overall, agreement between parents' perceptions of their child's willingness to eat the test foods and their child's responses was 73.4%.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,013
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,013
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,067

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0130,018
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,043
Tête enseignante GPT0,326
Écart entre enseignants0,283 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Même sujetDietetics, Nutrition, and EducationTravaux en français237 207