MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3015853593 · doi:10.2196/16431

Nutritional Education and Promotion of Healthy Eating Behaviors Among Mexican Children Through Video Games: Design and Pilot Test of FoodRateMaster

2020· article· en· W3015853593 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ismael Edrein Espinosa‐Curiel, Edgar Efrén Pozas-Bogarin, Jorge Luis Lozano-Salas, Juan Martı́nez-Miranda, Edwin Emeth Delgado-Pérez, Lizeth Stefania Estrada-Zamarron

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Serious Games · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueEducational Games and Gamification
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
Mots-clésPromotion (chess)Test (biology)Video gamePsychologyPerceptionHealthy foodCognitionHealthy eatingMedicineObesityGerontologyDevelopmental psychologyPhysical activityPhysical therapyMultimediaPsychiatryFood science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Childhood obesity has risen dramatically in recent decades, reaching epidemic levels. Children need guidance on and support for maintaining a healthy diet and physical activity to ensure that they grow appropriately and develop healthy eating habits. Serious video games have shown positive effects on promoting the nutritional knowledge, and eating attitudes and behaviors of children; however, research about the usefulness of such games with younger children (8-10 years old) is sparse. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to design and test the serious video game FoodRateMaster targeting children between 8 and 10 years old. The game includes nutritional information and behavior change techniques to help children improve their knowledge of healthy and unhealthy foods, increase their intake of healthy food, and reduce their intake of ultraprocessed food. In addition, FoodRateMaster was designed as an active game to promote physical activity. METHODS: An interdisciplinary team developed FoodRateMaster following an iterative methodology based on a user-centered design. A total of 60 participants (mean age 9 years, SD 0.8; 53% male) completed 12 individual gaming sessions in 6 weeks. A food knowledge questionnaire and a food frequency questionnaire were completed before and after game play. In addition, 39 of the participants' parents answered a parent perception questionnaire after the game play. RESULTS: Participants showed increased food knowledge from pregame (mean 56.9, SD 10.7) to postgame play (mean 67.8, SD 10.7; P<.001). In addition, there was a greater self-reported frequency in the consumption of cauliflower and broccoli (P<.001) and corn quesadillas (P<.001). They also indicated a lower self-reported intake of 10 unhealthy foods, including french fries (P=.003), candy and chocolate (P<.001), sweet soft cakes (P=.009), and soft drinks (P=.03). Moreover, most of the parents who answered the parent perception questionnaire agreed that their children showed greater interest in explaining why they should avoid some unhealthy foods (67%, 26/39), in distinguishing between healthy and unhealthy foods (64%, 25/39), and in the intake of fruits (64%, 25/39) and vegetables (59%, 23/39). Finally, 14 parents stated that they introduced some changes in their children's diet based on the comments and suggestions they received from their children. CONCLUSIONS: In an initial evaluation, children between 8 and 10 years old indicated an increased level in nutritional knowledge and their self-reported frequency intake of two healthy foods, and a decreased level in their self-reported intake of 10 unhealthy foods after playing FoodRateMaster. Moreover, the participants' parents agreed that FoodRateMaster positively influenced their children's attitudes toward several healthy eating behaviors. These results support that health games such as FoodRateMaster are viable tools to help young children increase their food knowledge and improve dietary behaviors. A follow-up randomized controlled trial will be conducted to assess the medium- and long-term effects of FoodRateMaster.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,080
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,628

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,039
Tête enseignante GPT0,332
Écart entre enseignants0,293 · 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 tête enseignante, 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

Citations49
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Serious GamesMême sujetEducational Games and GamificationTravaux en français237 207