MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A school feeding program based on the Eco‐Health approach: A case study from rural Lebanon

2013· article· en· W194430084 on OpenAlexaffabout
Malek Batal, Hala Ghattas, Rheam Abou‐Ezze

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverweightNutrition EducationMedicineSchool mealIntervention (counseling)MealEnvironmental healthAnemiaRural areaHealth educationGerontologyPediatricsObesityPublic healthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the Eco‐Health approach, a local women's cooperative was paired with a rural school to provide traditional foods to children through a school feeding and nutrition education program. We investigated the effect of this program versus nutrition education alone on nutritional status, breakfast consumption and attitude towards traditional diets. Two elementary schools from the village of Aarsal, Lebanon participated in the study. At baseline and endpoint, height, weight, hemoglobin and breakfast recall were taken. All children received four nutrition education sessions and children from the intervention school received a daily school meal for 4 days/week for 5 months. Qualitative data were collected from meetings with parents. At baseline, stunting, overweight and anemia prevalence were at 8%, 20% and 6%, respectively. There was a significant decrease in anemia prevalence among schoolchildren taking part in the school feeding intervention (p<0.0001). Breakfast consumption habits improved at both schools with a significant decrease in number of children not consuming breakfast (p<0.001). Schoolchildren in the intervention school demonstrated improved attitudes towards traditional diet and healthy lifestyle practices. This school feeding program provides a potentially sustainable local model for school feeding programs in similar rural contexts in countries undergoing a nutrition transition. This research has been funded by Canada's International Development Research Center (IDRC).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations→French-language works237,207→