MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019363925 · doi:10.1017/s1368980009993260

Fresh market to supermarket: nutrition transition insights from Chiang Mai, Thailand

2010· article· en· W2019363925 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bronwyn Isaacs, Jane Dixon, Cathy Banwell

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Nutrition · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMount Allison UniversityUniversity of Sydney
KeywordsChiang maiThaisFood marketBusinessNutrition transitionKuala lumpurFresh foodAdvertisingMarketingSocioeconomicsGeographyFood scienceDemographyMedicineEconomicsObesityBiologySociologyOverweight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: A preliminary investigation into different eating patterns among Thai consumers who shop at fresh markets as opposed to supermarkets in Chiang Mai. DESIGN: A short questionnaire adopted from a previous study was administered to the forty-four participants, who comprised supermarket users, fresh market users and people who consistently shopped at both supermarkets and fresh markets. SETTING: Participants were recruited within four fresh markets and two food courts attached to supermarkets in Chiang Mai. SUBJECTS: Chiang Mai residents who agreed to participate in the study. Equal numbers were regular fresh market and supermarket users. RESULTS: Initial results suggest an association between shopping at supermarkets and attributing bread with culinary value. CONCLUSIONS: Supermarkets may be potentially significant players in the 'nutrition transition', providing Thais more convenient shopping at some cost to their healthy food choices.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Health NutritionSame topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207