Food advertising during children's television in Canada and the UK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Television advertisements for less healthy foods are thought to contribute to overweight and obesity in children. In the UK, new regulations on television food advertising to children came into effect in April 2007. These prohibit advertisements for "less healthy" foods during or around programmes "of particular appeal to" (OPAT) children. In Canada, self-regulated codes of practice on television food advertising to children were recently strengthened. OBJECTIVE: To document the nutritional content of food advertised and number of advertisements OPAT children broadcast in the UK and central Canada before the introduction of the new UK regulations. DESIGN: All food advertisements broadcast on four popular channels in Canada and the three terrestrial commercial channels in the UK during 1 week in 2006 were identified and linked to relevant nutritional data. Food advertisements OPAT children and for "less healthy" products were identified using the criteria in the UK regulations. RESULTS: 2315 food related advertisements broadcast in Canada and 1365 broadcast in the UK were included. 52-61% were for "less healthy" products; 5-11% were OPAT children. Around 5% of food advertisements would have been prohibited under the new UK regulations. There were few differences in the nutritional content of food described in advertisements that were and were not OPAT children. CONCLUSION: There was little evidence that food described in advertisements OPAT children were any less healthy than those that were not. Few food advertisements are likely to be prohibited by the new UK regulations.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".