<i>A Review of Family Meal Influence</i>On Adolescents’ Dietary Intake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent concerns about adolescent nutrition and unhealthy weights have prompted an examination of the myriad influences on dietary intake during adolescence. Included here are a summary of the literature on family influence on dietary intake, specifically during adolescence and within the family context, a summary of family meal patterns, and a systematic review of the known influences of family meals on dietary intake. Because of the complexity of families in today's society, models were developed to depict the broad context of familial influences on adolescent nutritional behaviours and attitudes and to describe what is known and not known about family meal influences on adolescent dietary intake and quality. A systematic review of the literature revealed seven articles specifically related to adolescents, family meals, and dietary intake, which were analyzed for strength of evidence and plausibility. In spite of data collection methods relying on self-report, results suggested that family meals were associated with improved dietary intakes. Families in today's societies are complex. Nevertheless, parents have the potential to influence positively, through family meals, what food is provided, where it is provided (e.g., home, restaurant), and within what type of atmosphere it is provided.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".