Healthy Eating Perceptions of Older Adults Living in Canadian Rural and Northern Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aging produces physiologic changes that can affect the nutritional health of the older adult. It is estimated that 80% of community-dwelling older adults have inadequate intakes of four or more nutrients. Socioeconomic factors, such as income and geographic location, can also play an important role in nutritional status; however, limited research is available that specifically explores this. The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the healthy eating perceptions of older adults residing in rural and northern communities in one Canadian province. Five focus groups were conducted in three rural and two northern Manitoba communities. Thirty-nine older adults participated in audio-recorded focus groups. Five themes emerged from the discussions. All respondents stated that healthy eating was important, but knowledge deficits were observed regarding label reading, understanding and visualizing portion sizes, and vitamin D recommendations and sources. Food programs were not commonly attended by participants due to availably and resistance. Regularly delivered nutrition education programs would assist in providing current nutrition information to older adults and their families in rural settings.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".