Participation in School Food and Nutrition Activities among Grade 6–8 Students in Vancouver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined student-reported participation in school food and nutrition activities in Vancouver, British Columbia (BC), and whether engagement differed by gender and between elementary and secondary school students. A cross-sectional survey of grade 6-8 public school students (n = 937) from 20 elementary and 6 secondary schools assessed student-reported participation in a range of food and nutrition activities. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and multilevel logistic regression to examine associations between participation with gender and school type. Overall, <50% of students reported engaging in most of the food and nutrition activities examined in the 2011-2012 school year, including: food preparation (36%), choosing/tasting healthy foods (27%), learning about Canada's Food Guide (CFG) (45%), learning about foods grown in BC (35%), gardening (21%), composting (32%), and recycling (51%). Females were more likely to report recycling and learning about CFG and BC-grown foods (P < 0.05). Secondary students were more likely to report activities focused on working with or learning about food/nutrition (P < 0.05). Despite local and provincial efforts to engage students in food and nutrition experiences, participation in most activities remains relatively low, with few students exposed to multiple activities. Continued advocacy is needed from the dietetics community to improve student engagement in food and nutrition activities.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".