MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1928308208 · doi:10.1111/cob.12099

A systematic review of the effectiveness of school‐based obesity prevention programmes for <scp>F</scp>irst <scp>N</scp>ations, <scp>I</scp>nuit and <scp>M</scp>étis youth in <scp>C</scp>anada

2015· review· en· W1928308208 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Katelyn Godin, Scott T. Leatherdale, Tara Elton‐Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Obesity · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthRegional Municipality of WaterlooUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

First Nations, Inuit and Métis (FNIM) youth are disproportionately affected by obesity and represent known a high-risk group in Canada. School-based prevention programmes may have the potential to effectively influence obesity-related health behaviours (i.e. healthy eating and physical activity) among this population. We conducted a systematic review of nine electronic databases (2003-2014) to identify studies that describe school-based programmes that have been developed to improve obesity-related health behaviours and outcomes among FNIM youth in Canada. The objectives of this review were to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of these programmes and assess the strength of the methodologies used to evaluate them. Fifteen studies, representing seven distinct interventions, met our inclusion criteria. The majority of these programmes did not result in significant improvements in outcomes related to obesity, healthy eating, or physical activity among FNIM youth. The studies varied in design rigour and use of evaluation activities. The lack of literature on effective school-based programmes for FNIM youth in Canada that target obesity-related outcomes highlights a priority area for future intervention development, evaluation and dissemination within the peer-reviewed literature. Further research is needed on interventions involving Métis and Inuit youth, secondary school-aged FNIM youth and FNIM youth living in urban settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.076
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.076
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.008
Bibliometrics0.0110.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ObesitySame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207