MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2401309021 · doi:10.3148/68.1.2007.42

<i>Choix et comportements alimentaires</i>d'enfants québécois

2007· article· en· W2401309021 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marie Marquis, Jessica Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBedroomObesityFood habitsConsumption (sociology)Environmental healthChildhood obesityPsychologyFood consumptionMedicineFood choiceFront (military)DemographyGerontologyOverweightGeographyEndocrinologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The relationships are explored between food choices of school-aged children and eating in the bedroom, while watching television, or in front of the computer. METHODS: Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire that 534 subjects completed in class. Participants were ten- to 12-year-old children from Québec. RESULTS: Significant positive correlations were found between the act of eating in the bedroom and eating in front of the television or the computer (p<0.05). Significant positive correlations were also found between eating in the bedroom, or eating in front of the television or the computer, and the consumption of low-density food, foods high in sugar and fat, and foods low in fibre (p<0.05). Data also revealed more negative food habits for boys than for girls (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Because of the prevalence of childhood obesity, these findings support the need to document children's food consumption patterns and gender differences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and ResearchSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207