Sustainable childhood obesity prevention through community engagement (SCOPE) program: evaluation of the implementation phase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Childhood obesity rates are steadily rising. Sustainable Childhood Obesity Prevention Through Community Engagement (SCOPE) is a community-based participatory action research (PAR) program aimed at preventing childhood obesity. This study aimed to describe community perspectives on, and elicit feedback about, SCOPE's first phase of implementation in two pilot cities in British Columbia, Canada. A case study was implemented using interviews and questionnaires to obtain feedback about SCOPE from two groups: SCOPE coordinators and stakeholders (i.e., individuals and organizations that were a member of the community and engaged with SCOPE coordinators). Participants were recruited via email and (or) by telephone. Coordinators completed a telephone interview. Stakeholders completed a questionnaire and (or) a telephone interview. Thematic analysis was conducted. Participants included 2 coordinators and 15 stakeholders. Participants similarly interpreted SCOPE as a program focused on raising awareness about childhood obesity prevention, while engaging multiple community sectors. Overall, participants valued the program's role in facilitating networking and partnership development, providing evidence-based resources, technical expertise, and contributing funding. Participants felt that SCOPE is sustainable. However, participants felt that barriers to achieving healthy weights among children included those related to the built environment, and social, behavioral, and economic obstacles. Perspectives on factors that facilitated and acted as barriers to SCOPE's first phase of implementation were obtained from the SCOPE communities and may be used to enhance the sustainability of SCOPE and its applicability to other BC communities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".