MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2565689409 · doi:10.9741/23736658.1023

Connecting culturally and spiritually to healthy eating: A community assessment with Native Hawaiians

2016· article· en· W2565689409 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mary Frances Oneha, Joan E. Dodgson, Mabel Ho Oipo DeCambra, Carol Hi‘ilani Titcomb, Rachelle Enos, Sandie Morimoto-Ching

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
KeywordsNative HawaiiansParticipatory action researchOperationalizationPsychological interventionPsychologyQualitative researchIntervention (counseling)GerontologyMedicineSociologyEnvironmental healthPsychiatryPacific islandersPopulationAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many of the chronic illnesses disproportionately experienced by Native Hawaiians are directly related to poor diets and long-standing obesity beginning in childhood. We report on the findings of in-depth key informant interviews (N=14) that took place in two Native Hawaiian communities as part of a larger, community-based participatory research study that included a community assessment through individual interviews and focused group discussions, and a pilot intervention targeting pregnant women, their infants, and families. Four categories emerged from the qualitative analysis of interview transcripts that described an understanding of "healthy eating": family roles and responsibilities, aspects of community and physical environment, deeper spiritual meaning of food, and ways of operationalizing personal eating choices. The findings revealed previously undocumented intergenerational influences on healthy eating patterns and informed the design of the next study phases and are of significance in targeting nutritional interventions for Native Hawaiians.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0150.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian/Pacific Island Nursing JournalSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207