Staying in school for lunch instead of eating in fast-food restaurants: results of a quasi-experimental study among high-school students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Following the adoption of food policies replacing unhealthy products by healthy foods in school, the present study tested the effectiveness of an intervention aimed at encouraging high-school students to stay in school for lunch instead of eating in fast-food restaurants. DESIGN: A 12-week multi-strategy intervention targeting specific determinants of behaviour was evaluated via a quasi-experimental pre- and post-intervention design. A self-administered questionnaire was employed based on the theory of planned behaviour. SETTING: An experimental (n 129) and a control school (n 112) in central Canada. SUBJECTS: High-school students aged 12 to 17 years. RESULTS: Compared with control school students, those in the experimental school significantly increased the mean number of days that they stayed in school for lunch (relative risk = 1.55; 95 % CI 1.06, 2.27; P = 0.024), as well as the proportion who remained in school for lunch every day (relative risk = 1.21; 95 % CI 1.04, 1.40; P = 0.014). Among the psychosocial variables targeted, only self-efficacy appeared to be influenced by the intervention, mainly because of a decline in control group values. Mediation analysis indicated a significant mediating effect of self-efficacy on the mean number of days that students stayed in school for lunch (bias-corrected and accelerated point estimate = 0.079; 95 % CI 0.0059, 0.1958). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that interventions aimed at enhancing self-efficacy can successfully contribute to students staying in school during lunch time. Such interventions should be considered in obesity prevention programmes adapted to high-school students.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".