MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How will a room service delivery system affect dietary intake, food costs, food waste and patient satisfaction in a paediatric hospital? A pilot study

2008· article· en· W2077907433 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Kuperberg, Angelina Caruso, Susan Dello, Diana R. Mager

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Foodservice · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Nutrition and Feeding Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMealFood wastePatient satisfactionFood serviceService (business)Environmental healthNursingBusinessWaste managementInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The current meal delivery system at The Hospital for Sick Children is a cold‐plating tray delivery system. Our goal was to determine the effect of a room service model on satisfaction, food costs/waste and macronutrient intake in an inpatient paediatric setting. A prospective cross‐sectional study of inpatients (n = 54) was studied over 6 days, 3 days under the current system and 3 days under the pilot model. A satisfaction questionnaire was used to assess satisfaction, and tray tickets were used to assess food costs/waste and dietary intake. With room service, satisfaction increased (P < 0.05), food costs decreased at breakfast and lunch (P < 0.05), and reductions in waste occurred at all meals (P < 0.05). There was an increase in energy, protein, carbohydrate and fat intake (P < 0.05) during lunch. Piloting a room service model in an acute‐care paediatric centre resulted in increased satisfaction, improved dietary intake and reduced food costs and waste, resulting in hospital‐wide implementation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations40
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of FoodserviceSame topicChild Nutrition and Feeding IssuesFrench-language works237,207