MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527862822 · doi:10.20381/ruor-6360

An Aboriginal Perspective of the Influences of Food Intake

2014· dissertation· en· W2527862822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria-Elena Sultan-Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Environmental ethicsGeographyComputer sciencePhilosophyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The purpose of this phenomenological study is to explore the existing research on the determinants and influential factors of eating decisions made by Aboriginal peoples and provide insight from the perspective of Aboriginal peoples living off-reserve in Ottawa, Ontario. Methods: This study was comprised of a convenience sample of 12 Aboriginal individuals from a local Aboriginal community centre. Participants were asked to conduct a personal food diary of their meals for a period of 3 days, followed by a one-on-one semi-structured interview. The interviews were designed to explore: 1) knowledge and perspectives of healthy eating 2) knowledge and perspectives of Health Canada’s Eating Well with Canada’s Food Guide – First Nations, Inuit and Métis, 3) perception of influential factors 4) self-efficacy and 5) common barriers in making food choices. Results: 1) Except for the senior participants, healthy food knowledge did not translate into healthy food choices for most participants; 2) Most participants had not seen a copy of the Eating Well with Canada’s Food Guide – First Nations, Inuit and Métis, and all participants felt they were not influenced by it when making eating decisions; 3) The main themes of influential factors were concluded to be: taste preference, availability, convenience, “had no choice”, health reasons, “easy to make”, low in cost, following a diet or “food schedule,” hunger or thirst, “needed something quick”, nearby location (of store or restaurant), being tired or lazy and being in a routine; 4) Most participants perceived themselves as having control over their eating decisions regardless of situational factors and level of motivation varied between participants; 5) Time, financial constraints, having a busy schedule and being unprepared for meals were identified as possible barriers. Conclusions: Either version of the food guide should be developed into a more flexible and convenient tool such as a mobile application. Local community centres should consider providing workshops in food preparation, and to strengthen skills such as understanding food labels of market foods to ease the transition to living off-reserve. Future Implications: Policy makers at the federal, provincial and municipal levels should work together and strengthen their communication strategies in order to coordinate the development and implementation of future interventions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207