Promoting Nutritional Well-being in Seniors: Feasibility Study of a Nutrition Information Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Better Living Health and Community Services developed a 12-week community-based nutrition information series (NIS) for people aged 55 or older. The purpose of this feasibility study was to describe briefly the process of developing and implementing the 12-week NIS and to identify the practicality and plausibility of the program in terms of its process and content attributes, using Thorncliffe Park community as the test site. A pre- and post-test design was used to identify changes in participants' perception of their nutritional and overall well-being. Twenty-four participants who completed at least four sessions participated in the post-evaluation follow-up. Only participants' perception of their eating habits demonstrated a significant, positive improvement (t24=2.1, P<0.05). The results suggest that the NIS has the potential to promote the health and well-being of community-living seniors. The development and implementation of the NIS provided considerations for program practicality. However, additional work is needed to examine the plausibility of the program in meeting its stated objective to promote awareness of nutrition as an important concept for healthy aging. Community-practising dietitians are instrumental in providing credible nutrition information to facilitate healthy eating in older Canadians.
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 | 0.020 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".