Caregiver food behaviours are associated with dietary intakes of children outside the child-care setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether food behaviours of parents are associated with children’s dietary intakes outside the child-care setting, and to compare children’s dietary intakes at home with foods and beverages consumed when they are at child-care centres. DESIGN: In 2005–2006, a survey was completed by parents of at least one child between 3 and 5 years old who attended group child-care centres. Surveys about nutrition practices were completed by centre directors. Research assistants observed foods and beverages consumed by children at lunchtime at the centres. SETTING: Sixteen licensed group child-care centres in three underserved New York City communities (South Bronx, East/Central Harlem, Central Brooklyn) and the Lower East Side of Manhattan. SUBJECTS: Two hundred parents. RESULTS: Children were more likely to consume healthful foods including fruits or vegetables if parents reported purchasing food from produce stands/farmers’ markets, shopped for frozen or canned fruits frequently and ate family meals or meals prepared at home daily. Children were more likely to consume less healthful foods such as French fries, or fruit drinks, more frequently if parents reported eating meals from fast-food or other restaurants at least once weekly, or if children ate while watching television. Types of foods and beverages offered to children at home (e.g. higher-fat milk, soft drinks and desserts) were less healthful than those offered at child-care centres. CONCLUSIONS: Children’s dietary intakes at home need to be improved. Parents need to understand the importance of providing home environments that support healthful food behaviours in children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".