MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977543355 · doi:10.1017/s0029665113003819

Modifying the food environment for childhood obesity prevention: challenges and opportunities

2014· review· en· W1977543355 on OpenAlexaff
Tarra L. Penney, Eva Almiron‐Roig, Cindy Shearer, Jessie‐Lee D. McIsaac, Sara Kirk

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of The Nutrition Society · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationChildhood obesityEnvironmental healthPopulationPsychologyRelevance (law)ObesityMedicinePolitical scienceOverweight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prevention of childhood obesity is a global priority. However, a range of complex social and environmental influences is implicated in the development of obesity and chronic disease that goes beyond the notion of individual choice. A population-level approach recognises the importance of access to and availability of healthy foods outside the home. These external food environments, in restaurants, supermarkets, and in school, or recreation and sports settings, are often characterised by energy dense, nutrient-poor food items that do not reflect the current nutritional guidelines for health. In addition, our understanding of these broader influences on nutritional intake is still limited. Particularly, lacking is a clear understanding of what constitutes the food environment, as well as robust measures of components of the food environment across different contexts. Therefore, this review summarises the literature on food environments of relevance to childhood obesity prevention, with a focus on places where children live, learn and play. Specifically, the paper highlights the approaches and challenges related to defining and measuring the food environment, discusses the aspects of the food environment unique to children and reports on environmental characteristics that are being modified within community, school and recreational settings. Results of the review show the need for a continued focus on understanding the intersection between individual behaviour and external factors; improved instrument development, especially regarding validity and reliability; clearer reported methodology including protocols for instrument use and data management; and considering novel study design approaches that are targeted at measuring the relationship between the individual and their food environment.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations71
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of The Nutrition SocietySame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207