MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132674335 · doi:10.1111/obr.12079

Monitoring foods and beverages provided and sold in public sector settings

2013· review· en· W2132674335 on OpenAlexafffund
Mary R. L’Abbé, Alyssa Schermel, Leia Minaker, Bridget Kelly, Amanda Lee, Stefanie Vandevijvere, Patrick Twohig, Sı́món Barquera, Sharon Friel, Corinna Hawkes, Shiriki Kumanyika, Tim Lobstein, Jiaqi Ma, J. Macmullan, Sailesh Mohan, Carlos Augusto Monteiro, Bruce Neal, Mike Rayner, Gary Sacks, David Sanders, Wendy Snowdon, B. Swinburn, Chris Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Reviews · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of CalgaryImpactUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilWorld Cancer Research FundMedical Research CouncilPerelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaWorld Cancer Research Fund InternationalUniversity of PennsylvaniaQueensland University of TechnologyDeakin UniversityUniversity of OxfordUniversity of TorontoWorld Health Organization
KeywordsBusinessJurisdictionQuality (philosophy)Food standardsComponent (thermodynamics)Public sectorEnvironmental healthFood safetyMarketingMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper outlines a step-wise framework for monitoring foods and beverages provided or sold in publicly funded institutions. The focus is on foods in schools, but the framework can also be applied to foods provided or sold in other publicly funded institutions. Data collection and evaluation within this monitoring framework will consist of two components. In component I, information on existing food or nutrition policies and/or programmes within settings would be compiled. Currently, nutrition standards and voluntary guidelines associated with such policies/programmes vary widely globally. This paper, which provides a comprehensive review of such standards and guidelines, will facilitate institutional learnings for those jurisdictions that have not yet established them or are undergoing review of existing ones. In component II, the quality of foods provided or sold in public sector settings is evaluated relative to existing national or sub-national nutrition standards or voluntary guidelines. Where there are no (or only poor) standards or guidelines available, the nutritional quality of foods can be evaluated relative to standards of a similar jurisdiction or other appropriate standards. Measurement indicators are proposed (within 'minimal', 'expanded' and 'optimal' approaches) that can be used to monitor progress over time in meeting policy objectives, and facilitate comparisons between countries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations52
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity ReviewsSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207