Targeted Messages Increase Dairy Consumption in Adults: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dairy consumption amongst North Americans aged 30-50 has been declining. Targeted messages have been identified as a cost-efficient method through which to increase health-enhancing behavior, such as dairy intake. PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to assess the utility of targeted, framed, efficacy-enhancing messages on calcium consumption from dairy in adults aged 30-50 in a randomized controlled trial. METHOD: = 40.57 years) were randomly assigned to one of five message conditions: (1) gain-framed (GF), (2) loss-framed (LF), (3) self-regulatory efficacy-enhancing (SRE), (4) GF plus SRE (GF + SRE), or (5) LF plus SRE (LF + SRE). Conditions were separate for men and women. Each condition received an emailed message on four consecutive days. Calcium intake from dairy, self-regulatory efficacy, outcome expectations, and outcome value were measured at baseline, 1 and 4 weeks following the intervention. RESULTS: Calcium intake from dairy significantly increased from baseline to week 1 post-intervention in all conditions (p < .001). A significant message condition x time interaction (p = .04) revealed that increases seen in the LF + SRE condition were maintained at week 4. All social cognitive constructs increased following the intervention (ps < .01). Self-regulatory efficacy (β = .28, p < .01) and outcome expectations (β = .19, p < .01) were significant predictors of subsequent calcium intake (week 4) from dairy. CONCLUSION: Taken together, it appears as though ensuring message content is targeted to the specific population's beliefs and motives is of importance when developing behavioral change intervention material.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".