Parents’ perceptions and attitudes on childhood obesity: A Q‐methodology study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate parents of young children for their perceptions on the causes of obesity, the impact of childhood obesity on health, and the barriers to successful prevention of childhood obesity. DATA SOURCES: The target population included parents who attended a clinic for their well-baby check-up. The study was conducted in two phases. Using Q-methodology, 33 parents were classified into two groups representing two viewpoints: "confident in delivering healthy nutrition" and "family physical activity focused." CONCLUSION: This work indicates that parents have varying foci on causation of obesity, and differ in focus on nutrition and physical activity. Most of the parents in this study were aware of healthy nutrition, and about one third of them believed in the benefits of physical activity for children and did not see being overweight or obese as a barrier to physical activity. The first group was confident in being able to deliver healthy nutrition to their family, and the second group was characterized by a focus on physical activity and its role in childhood obesity. Both groups agreed that exercising and sports are very important to a child's health status. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Nurse practitioners have a unique role in the health system and are one of the best facilitators to deliver health messages to the public; thus, they are able to educate parents and increase their awareness about the causes and consequences of childhood obesity.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it