Association between childcare educators’ practices and preschoolers’ physical activity and dietary intake: a cross-sectional analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Childcare educators may be role models for healthy eating and physical activity (PA) behaviours among young children. This study aimed to identify which childcare educators' practices are associated with preschoolers' dietary intake and PA levels. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis included 723 preschoolers from 50 randomly selected childcare centres in two Canadian provinces. All data were collected in the fall of 2013 and 2014 and analysed in the fall of 2015. PA was assessed using Actical accelerometers during childcare hours for 5 consecutive days. Children's dietary intake was measured at lunch on 2 consecutive days using weighed plate waste and digital photography. Childcare educators' nutrition practices (modelling, nutrition education, satiety recognition, verbal encouragement and not using food as rewards) and PA practices (informal and formal PA promotion) were assessed by direct observation over the course of 2 days, using the Nutrition and Physical Activity Self-Assessment for Child Care tool. Associations between educators' practices and preschoolers' PA and dietary intake were examined using multilevel linear regressions. RESULTS: Overall, modelling of healthy eating was positively associated with children's intake of sugar (β=0.141, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.27), while calorie (β=-0.456, 95% CI -1.46 to -0.02) and fibre intake (β=-0.066, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.01) were negatively associated with providing nutrition education. Not using food as rewards was also negatively associated with fat intake (β=-0.144, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.002). None of the educators' PA practices were associated with children's participation in PA. CONCLUSIONS: Modelling healthy eating, providing nutrition education and not using food as rewards are associated with children's dietary intake at lunch in childcare centres, highlighting the role that educators play in shaping preschoolers' eating behaviours. Although PA practices were not associated with children's PA levels, there is a need to reduce sedentary time in childcare centres.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".