Parental Health Beliefs, Socio-demographics, and Healthcare Recommendations Influence Micronutrient Supplementation in Youth with Celiac Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To identify parental influences affecting micronutrient supplementation in children and adolescents (2-18 years of age) with Celiac Disease (CD), a multi-method (survey, focus groups) study was conducted. A 35-item questionnaire consisting of open- and closed-ended questions was launched nationally via Canadian Celiac Association internet sites. Five focus groups were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide. The survey and semi-structured interview guide content was vetted for face and content validity. Thematic analyses were conducted on the focus group content and open-ended survey questions, and χ(2) and Fischer's exact analysis were performed on closed-ended survey data. Survey respondents were predominantly mothers (97%) of female children (80 F, 49 M) between the ages of 9-12 (31%) with CD, residing in western provinces (55%) with a combined family income ≥$100 000/year (63%). Seventy-seven percent of parental respondent's children or adolescents consumed micronutrient supplements, for 1-5 years (52%), 7 days a week (65%), as both multi-vitamin and single vitamin preparations (40%). Parental influences on child micronutrient use included health beliefs and knowledge, parental supplement use, supplement characteristics, age of child (above or below 13 years), household routines, and provincial residential status (P < 0.05). Parents relied on health professional recommendation (69%; MD, RD) and the internet (21%) as sources of information regarding child micronutrient supplementation. Parental health beliefs and knowledge, socio-demographic factors, and practitioner recommendation influence micronutrient supplement use in children and adolescents with CD.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".