Associations among evening snacking, screen time, weight status, and overall diet quality in young adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the associations among evening snacking (food choices, portion sizes), afterschool-evening screen time, overall diet quality, and weight status. Participants consisted of 1008 young adolescents (secondary analyses, n = 651) from schools in Windsor-Essex, Ontario. The Web-based Food Behaviour Questionnaire, including a 24-h diet recall, was used to assess eating and screen time behaviours (television and video and computer games), as well as nutrient intake; height and weight for BMI were measured using a stadiometer. Results indicated that the majority of participants (62%) consumed an evening snack that contributed approximately 11% of their daily caloric intake. Evening snacking was associated with an overall good diet quality compared with that of non-evening snackers (p < 0.001). Increased afterschool-evening screen time was associated with fewer evening snack servings of vegetables and fruit (p < 0.05) and an overall increase in evening snack food portion sizes (p < 0.001). After accounting for other evening snacking factors, participants with greater than 6 h of afterschool-evening screen time were less likely to have a good overall diet quality compared with those with less than 1 h of afterschool-evening screen time. Therefore, increased screen time, because it is associated with greater evening snack portion sizes and overall poor diet quality, is of great concern regarding young adolescents' evening behaviour.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".