Gender differences in growth and nutrition in a sample of rural ontario schoolchildren
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports findings of a cross-sectional study of the growth and nutrition of children living in rural Ontario, Canada. The objectives of the research were threefold: (1) to obtain data on obesity prevalence and nutrient intake in a sample of rural Canadian schoolchildren, (2) to compare findings with rural and national-level data on obesity prevalence and nutrient intake, and (3) to provide data to school board and public health agencies planning and implementing nutrition policy and programs to this population. Measures of height and weight were obtained for 504 children ages 7-13 years. Height for age and body mass index scores were calculated and compared with 2000 data from the Centers for Disease Control (Kuczmarski et al. [2002]: Vital Health Stat 246:1-190). Weekday 24-h dietary recall was conducted on a subsample of 352 children and the results compared with Canada's Food Guide (Health Canada,1997) and dietary reference data from the US Institute of Medicine (2000). Prevalence of overweight and obesity were high in this sample, with 17.7% of children classified as overweight and 10.9% of children classified as obese. Fifteen percent of boys were classified as obese, compared to 6.8% of girls. Boys consumed significantly more servings from the grain and meat food groups than girls. While mean daily intake of fiber and micronutrients was significantly low for both boys and girls, there were significant gender differences in nutrient intake, with boys consuming greater energy, protein, carbohydrate, calcium, iron, phosphorus, and sodium than girls. A number of limitations are discussed, in particular issues arising from the use of Dietary Reference Intakes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".