MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046489041 · doi:10.1186/1479-5868-10-42

Reliability and validity of the weight status and dietary intake measures in the COMPASS questionnaire: are the self-reported measures of body mass index (BMI) and Canada’s food guide servings robust?

2013· article· en· W2046489041 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Scott T. Leatherdale, Rachel E. Laxer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and DiabetesUniversity of WaterlooCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareCancer Care Ontario
KeywordsBody mass indexReliability (semiconductor)Food frequency questionnaireClinical nutritionGerontologyFood intakeMedicineEnvironmental healthValidityPsychologyIndex (typography)CompassBehavioural sciencesPsychometricsClinical psychologyComputer scienceGeographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The COMPASS study is designed to follow a cohort of ~30,000 grade 9 to 12 students attending ~60 secondary schools for four years to understand how changes in school characteristics (policies, programs, built environment) are associated with changes in youth health behaviours. Since the student-level questionnaire for COMPASS (Cq) is designed to facilitate multiple large-scale school-based data collections using passive consent procedures, the Cq is only comprised of self-reported measures. The present study assesses the 1-week (1 wk) test-retest reliability and the concurrent validity of the Cq measures for weight status and dietary intake. METHODS: Validation study data were collected from 178 grade 9 students in Ontario (Canada). At time 1 (T1), participants completed the Cq and daily recoding of their dietary intake using the web-based eaTracker tool. After one week, (T2), students completed the Cq again, participants submitted their daily eaTracker logs and staff measured their height and weight. Test-retest reliability of the self-reported (SR) weight status and dietary intake measures at T1 and T2, and the concurrent validity of the objectively measured and SR weight status and dietary intake measures at T2 were examined using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). RESULTS: Test-retest reliability for SR height (ICC 0.96), weight (ICC 0.99), and BMI (ICC 0.95) are considered substantial. The concurrent validity for SR height (ICC 0.88), weight (ICC 0.95), and BMI (ICC 0.84) are also considered substantial. The test-retest reliability for SR dietary intake for fruits and vegetables (ICC 0.68) and milk and alternatives (ICC 0.69) are considered moderate, whereas meat and alternatives (ICC 0.41), and grain products (ICC 0.56) are considered fair. The concurrent validity for SR dietary intake identified that fruits and vegetables (ICC 0.53), milk and alternatives (ICC 0.60), and grain products (ICC 0.41) are considered fair, whereas meat and alternatives (ICC 0.34) was considered slight. CONCLUSIONS: While the test-retest reliability of the measures used in this study were all high, the concurrent validity of the measures was considered acceptable. The results support the use of the self-reported COMPASS weight status and dietary intake measures for use in research where objective measures are not possible.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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 score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations92
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical ActivitySame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207