Experiences of overweight/obese adolescents in navigating their home food environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore perceived factors that impede or facilitate healthful eating within the home environment among overweight/obese adolescents. DESIGN: In the present qualitative photovoice study, participants were instructed to take photographs of things that made it easier or harder to make healthful food choices at home. Digital photographs were reviewed and semi-structured interviews were conducted to promote discussion of the photographs. Data were analysed using constant comparative analysis. SETTING: Vancouver, Canada, in 2012-2013. SUBJECTS: Twenty-two overweight/obese adolescents who completed a family-based lifestyle modification intervention. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 14 (sd 1.9) years, 77% were female and their mean BMI Z-score was 2.4 (sd 0.6). Adolescents talked about six aspects of the home environment that influenced their eating habits (in order of frequency): home cooking, availability and accessibility of foods/beverages, parenting practices, family modelling, celebrations and screen use/studying. In general, homes with availability of less healthful foods, where family members also liked to eat less healthful foods and where healthier foods were less abundant or inaccessible were described as barriers to healthful eating. Special occasions and time spent studying or in front of the screen were also conducive to less healthful food choices. Home cooked meals supported adolescents in making healthier food choices, while specific parenting strategies such as encouragement and restriction were helpful for some adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents struggled to make healthful choices in their home environment, but highlighted parenting strategies that were supportive. Targeting the home food environment is important to enable healthier food choices among overweight/obese adolescents.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".