MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614185275 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2016-090

Do School Junk Food Bans Improve Student Health? Evidence from Canada

2017· article· en· W2614185275 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Philip S.J. Leonard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJunk foodObesityBody mass indexEnvironmental healthGeographyIndex (typography)Healthy foodUnhealthy foodDemographySocioeconomicsMedicineSociologyFood scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Six Canadian provinces have banned the sale of junk food on school property to address child health issues such as obesity. Differences in the timing of the introduction of provincial policies provide variation in treatment across provinces, and variation within provinces comes from differences across students in the number of years of schooling during which junk food was banned. Using data from cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey, I find that each year of a junk food ban is associated with a decline of about 0.05 body mass index. Students exposed to five or more years of a junk food ban had lower body mass index equivalent to a decrease of about two pounds for an individual who is five feet, six inches tall.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207