Evaluation of Dietitian Counselling Access Revealed Reduced Pediatrician-Reported Hospital Admissions and Increased Parental Knowledge and Confidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on a 1999 needs assessment a pediatric community-based outpatient dietitian counselling service was created. By 2010 annual referrals had grown to almost 1500 (62% from physicians; 38% from public health nurses). An evaluation was undertaken to gather perspectives of practitioners and parents about access, satisfaction, referral practices, and changes in knowledge, attitudes, behaviour, and child well-being. Health professionals surveyed via email were 62 pediatricians (response rate 71%), 25 family physicians (21%), 87 public health nurses (31%), and 7 dietitian providers (100%). Parents (n = 93, response rate 75% of those contacted) were interviewed by telephone. Pediatricians reported a significantly lower rate of 7% (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.8%-23%) for admitting children to hospital to access a dietitian, compared to 1999 of 39% (95% CI, 22%-59%) (P = 0.005). Health professionals reported a high degree of agreement on benefits of the service to their practice and on child health problems and a high degree of satisfaction with the service. Parents reported gaining knowledge (76%), confidence (93%), and making behaviour changes in foods offered (77%). Our evaluation demonstrated health practitioners saw a need for access to dietitians for pediatric dietitian counselling and parents reported more confidence and improved child feeding practices after dietitian counselling.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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, 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".