MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046377687 · doi:10.1111/apa.13028

A plant to plate pilot: a cold‐climate high school garden increased vegetable selection but also waste

2015· article· en· W2046377687 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian Wansink, Andrew Hanks, David R. Just

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Paediatrica · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsCafeteriaMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Selection (genetic algorithm)ToxicologyEnvironmental healthGeographyBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: Can high school gardens in cold climates influence vegetable intake in the absence of nutrition education? METHODS: This study followed a before/after design where student tray-waste data were collected using the quarter-waste method. The study took place March-April 2012 in a high school in upstate New York. The subjects were 370 enrolled high school students that purchased lunch from the school cafeteria. Prior to the introduction of garden greens in the salad, salads were served as usual. On April 24, harvested greens were included in the salad, and changes in selection and plate waste were measured. RESULTS: When the salad bar contained garden produce, the percentage of students selecting salad rose from 2% to 10% (p < 0.001), and on average, students ate two-thirds of the serving they took. Although waste increased relative to the control (from 5.56% to 33.33% per serving; p = 0.007), more students were consuming at least some salad. CONCLUSION: This preliminary investigation suggests that school gardens increased selection and intake of school-raised produce. Although a third was not eaten, it is promising to see that still more produce was consumed compared to the past.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa PaediatricaSame topicDiverse Educational Innovations StudiesFrench-language works237,207