The Good Food Box Pilot Project as a Contribution to Addressing Food Accessibility in the Elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Good Food Box (GFB) is a program that offers fresh produce to community members. The implementation of a GFB pilot project targeting the elderly in Côte Saint-Luc (CSL) is described. Feasibility is evaluated in terms of partnerships necessary to realize the project and suitability of the GFB among seniors. Outcomes, lessons learned, and future directions are also discussed. GFBs were delivered biweekly for 10 weeks to 14 participants over the age of 65 years. Baseline and final surveys were administered to assess user satisfaction and effects of the project. Overall, participants were satisfied, finding the location convenient and the produce to be of excellent quality. Respondents also indicated an increased quantity of fresh fruits and vegetables in their home and an enhanced connection with the community. Many participants commented on excessive quantity and difficulty preparing certain products, demonstrating that the GFB may not be practical for all seniors. Smaller quantities and volunteer assistance could improve the program. Following the successful pilot project, the GFB was expanded to all members of the CSL community. Using the GFB as a major source of fresh produce will positively impact the health and quality of life for those who reside within the community.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".