MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1893313220 · doi:10.1093/heapro/dav085

Food capacities and satisfaction in participants in food security community interventions in Montreal, Canada

2015· article· en· W1893313220 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Federico Roncarolo, Caroline Adam, Sherri Bisset, Louise Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion International · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsSanté MontérégieUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchProvincial Health Services Authority
KeywordsPsychological interventionFood securityEnvironmental healthIntervention (counseling)PsychologyMedicineGerontologyNursingGeographyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Food insecurity is steadily increasing in Canada. The objective of this paper is to determine if food capacities and satisfaction of recently enrolled participants in food security interventions are associated with the intervention having either a traditional or an alternative type of approach. Participants having recently accessed traditional (n = 711) or alternative community interventions (n = 113) in the Montreal metropolitan area, Canada, were interviewed with a questionnaire. The categorizing variable was participation in a community organization providing either traditional interventions, aimed to help people cope with the urgent need of food, or alternative interventions, aimed at first assistance, in addition to the creation of long-term solutions such as social integration and skills development. Participants' food and nutrition-related capacities and food satisfaction are studied. Multilevel regression models were used to assess whether participants took part in a traditional or alternative interventions. These interventions do not reach the same population. Relative to participants in alternative food security interventions, participants in traditional interventions demonstrated less capacity for accessing information about food safety and healthiness, and perceived their diet as less healthy. Traditional food security participants also paid less attention to the nutritional properties of food and reported less satisfaction with quantity, variety and taste of the food they accessed. The reasons why individuals who may benefit the most from alternative interventions were unlikely to participate should be investigated. The potential that food security interventions may inadvertently reinforce social inequalities in health should be considered in future intervention research.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.424
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.057 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion InternationalSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207