A Growth Status Measurement Pilot in Four Calgary Area Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reliable measures of growth in children are necessary for planning and evaluating obesity prevention programs. Currently, measured growth data are unavailable in Calgary for school-age children. This single sample, cross-sectional study included Grade 5 students and their parents. Height and weight measurements of 305 students (68% of those eligible) were taken in private in June 2007 and converted to Body Mass Index (BMI) categories. All but one student (99.7%) completed a questionnaire assessing perceptions of the measurement process. Parents received their child's growth data, an information package on healthy eating and active living, additional resources, and a questionnaire. A third of parents completed the questionnaire. Most students (94.1%) reported feeling "OK" or "Happy" about being measured. In addition, 93.2% of parents reported having "Low" or "Neutral" concerns about the measurement. Furthermore, 28.1% of responding parents reported seeking additional resources or considered making a lifestyle change for their family following the pilot. Measurement of students completed in private by nurses was acceptable to participants.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".