MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998546426 · doi:10.1080/07359680802619834

Factors Influencing Healthy Eating Habits Among College Students: An Application of the Health Belief Model

2009· article· en· W1998546426 on OpenAlexaff
Sameer Deshpande, Michael D. Basil, Debra Z. Basil

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Marketing Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth belief modelHealthy eatingPsychologyPhenomenonHealthy foodSocial psychologyEnvironmental healthStructural equation modelingEating behaviorPublic healthGerontologyMedicineHealth educationPhysical activityObesityStatisticsNursingMathematicsFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poor eating habits are an important public health issue that has large health and economic implications. Many food preferences are established early, but because people make more and more independent eating decisions as they move through adolescence, the transition to independent living during the university days is an important event. To study the phenomenon of food selection, the heath belief model was applied to predict the likelihood of healthy eating among university students. Structural equation modeling was used to investigate the validity of the health belief model (HBM) among 194 students, followed by gender-based analyses. The data strongly supported the HBM. Social change campaign implications are discussed.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations352
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Marketing QuarterlySame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207