Practising what we preach: A look at healthy active living policy and practice in Canadian paediatric hospitals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the past 30 years, the rate of obesity has risen considerably among Canadian children. Paediatric hospitals are in a unique position to model healthy environments to Canadian children. OBJECTIVE: To obtain an overview of healthy active living (HAL) policy and practice in Canadian paediatric hospitals. METHODS: Working in partnership with the local Canadian Paediatric Society HAL champions and the Canadian Association of Paediatric Health Centres liaisons, a nationwide survey was conducted in 2006/2007 to identify healthy eating, physical activity and smoking cessation practices in all 16 Canadian paediatric academic hospitals. RESULTS: Policies addressing healthy eating and/or physical activity promotion were present in 50% of hospitals with a greater focus on nutrition. Wellness committees were created in 50% of the hospitals, most of which were recently established. Healthy food options were available in cafeterias, although they were often more expensive. Fast food outlets were present in 75% of hospitals. Although inpatient meals were designed by dietitians, 50% offered less nutritious replacement kids meals (ie, meal substitutions) on request. Options for play available to inpatients and outpatients were primarily sedentary, with screen-based activities and crafts predominating over active play. Physical activity promotion for staff focused on reduced membership fees to fitness centres and classes. CONCLUSION: Canadian paediatric hospitals do not adequately promote HAL for patients and staff. The present study findings suggest further effort is required to create necessary healthy lifestyle modifications in these institutions through Canadian Paediatric Society/Canadian Association of Paediatric Health Centres-led policy development and implementation initiatives. A national-level policy framework is required to regulate interhospital variability in policies and practices.
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 | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".