Healthy Eating for Life English as a second language curriculum: applying the RE-AIM framework to evaluate a nutrition education intervention targeting cancer risk reduction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medically underserved US immigrants are at an increased risk for death from preventable or curable cancers due to economic, cultural, and/or linguistic barriers to medical care. The purpose of this study was to describe the evaluation of the pilot study of the Healthy Eating for Life (HE4L) English as a second language curriculum. The Reach, Effectiveness Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) model was used to design a mixed-methods approach to the evaluation of the HE4L curriculum. Successful implementation was dependent upon enthusiastic teacher and manager support of the curriculum, teachers' ability to flexibly apply the curriculum to meet student needs, and researcher provision of curriculum workbooks. HE4L can be implemented successfully in various adult education settings to teach healthy eating behaviors and English language principles. Scale-up of HE4L may depend on the development of an online version of the curriculum to avoid the costs associated with printing and distributing curriculum materials.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it