Achieving Healthy Body Weight in Teenagers: Evidence-based Practice Guidelines for Community Nutrition Interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An evidence-based review of research on obesity prevention and treatment in youth was conducted to identify successful elements of community nutrition interventions. Guidelines for dietetic practice appropriate to this age group were synthesized. Following a systematic review of English-language research papers published from 1996 to 2009, 63 interventions met inclusion criteria and were graded according to methodological quality, quantity, consistency, and reproducibility. They also were analyzed for common themes and used to develop guideline statements and a practice algorithm. A national panel of experts in community nutrition, public health, adolescent health, academia, and endocrinology assessed the guidelines and the practice algorithm for validity, acceptability, and applicability. Successful prevention strategies are comprehensive, address social and environmental influences, include nutrition education and physical activity, and use schools as a health promotion delivery venue. Computer- or technology-based and peer-modelling strategies are promising, developmentally appropriate approaches. Effective obesity treatment strategies utilize diet plans and behaviour modification techniques, and involve families in intensive, multidisciplinary interventions. Given the distinct needs of this age group, healthy body weight must be promoted through a comprehensive school-based approach. In summary, obesity prevention and treatment interventions should be comprehensive, multidisciplinary, and developmentally appropriate.
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 | 0.047 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".