Feasibility of a Grocery Store Tour for Parents and Their Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of a grocery store tour for parents and their adolescents being led by adults or adolescent peers. DESIGN: Randomized controlled pilot study with surveys at baseline and post-program, and at 3- and 6-month follow-up. SETTING: Midwestern midsized grocery stores. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-one parents and their 71 11- to 14-year-old adolescents. INTERVENTION: Nutrition education during 1 90-minute grocery store tour. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Process observations and participants' tour perceptions provided fidelity outcomes. Questionnaires quantitatively assessed participants' knowledge, self-efficacy, and tour strategy use. ANALYSIS: Chi-square and McNemar tests were used to analyze categorical data, and Kruskal-Wallis, Wilcoxon signed-rank, and Mann-Whitney U tests were employed for continuous variables (significance at P < .05). RESULTS: Over 90% of tour tasks were rated as completed well for adult and peer leaders. Participants had positive tour perceptions but noted deficiencies in teen leaders' knowledge and leadership skills. Overall, parents and adolescents retained increased self-efficacy from pre-tour to post-tour intervals. Despite limited knowledge retention, parents reported they had increased (6.5 ± 4.19) healthful grocery shopping behaviors in the 6 months after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Peers may feasibly lead grocery store tours but they may need additional resources and support to be highly effective.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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".