MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1899183548 · doi:10.1111/jppi.12067

Targeting Health Improvement via a Nutritional Intervention Program for Adults With Developmental Disabilities and Challenging Behaviors

2014· article· en· W1899183548 on OpenAlexaff
Meaghan Edwards, Michael Holder, Nehama Baum, Roy I. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Nutrition and Feeding Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMealIntervention (counseling)Meal preparationGerontologyMedicineGroup homeEnvironmental healthNursingPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Research suggests that individuals with developmental disabilities and challenging behaviors resulting from complex impairments tend to experience poor health status linked to lifestyle factors (including inadequate diet and poor nutrition). Individuals living in group home settings seem to be especially vulnerable, as they may often be provided with meals that may not be nutritionally adequate. This article describes how the need for a nutritional intervention program for group home staff was determined, the nature of the program itself, and the impact of the program upon meal composition and on staff and residents. Subjects were supervisors and group home staff members responsible for providing meals in four group homes to 21 residents. The program consisted of two training sessions for staff and follow‐up monitoring through daily photographing of meals, weekly communications with staff, and monthly measuring of the body mass of group home residents. The program was assessed through a time series evaluation of photograph ratings measuring meal composition. Results indicated that meal nutrition and composition improved significantly over the duration of the nutrition intervention program. The authors conclude that a meal enhancement model may be effective in improving meal nutritional compositions in group home and other community‐based settings, thus providing opportunities for improved health status.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.032
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.333 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual DisabilitiesSame topicChild Nutrition and Feeding IssuesFrench-language works237,207