<i>Weight Management In Childhood</i>Canadian Dietitians’ Practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian dietitians specializing in pediatric practice were surveyed to provide a preliminary profile of the strategies they use to manage overweight youth. The survey was mailed to 298 dietitians belonging to the Dietitians of Canada's (DC) Pediatric Nutrition and Consulting Dietitians' Networks and to the head dietitians in Canadian pediatric hospitals across the country. It was also posted on the DC website and sent by electronic mail. Of the 164 respondents, 65 reported that they provide an intervention program to overweight youth. Growth charts, ideal body weight, and body mass index were mostly used to assess and monitor overweight. However, about 20% of the respondents did not define overweight in their client population. The majority of the clients were girls aged seven to 18. Most respondents used the healthful lifestyle approach via one-on-one consultation, included parents and collaborated with two or more health professionals for the management of these children. As the discussion on best practices for the prevention and treatment of overweight youth continues, we need further evidence to determine what strategies, if any, support positive outcomes in this group.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".