Prevalence and Patterns of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption in Canadian Youth: A Northern Focus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regular consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is a well-known risk factor for weight gain, tooth decay, and metabolic syndrome. Rates of SSB consumption in Nunavut specifically, have been noted to be exceptionally high. This study describes consumption rates of specific foods and beverages, with a focus on SSBs, among adolescents in Nunavut, northern Canada as a whole, and the Canadian provinces, using data from the 2010 and 2014 cycles of the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study to investigate population characteristics and consumption patterns. Comparative analyses of consumption patterns for Nunavut, the three territories combined, and the southern provinces found that in 2010, those who consumed SSBs once a day or more comprised 53.1% of adolescents in Nunavut, 31.1% in the northern territories and 24% in the provinces. Comparable figures for 2014 were 55.0% in Nunavut, but only 27.0% in all the territories, and 19.1% in the provinces. The percentage of adolescents who consumed fruit and vegetables daily was also lower in Nunavut than in the provinces (65.5% vs. 85.3% in 2010, and 57.5% vs. 84.4% in 2014). More Nunavut adolescents consumed sweets and potato chips daily than provincial adolescents (42.6% vs. 27.6% in 2010, and 52.2% vs. 25.2% in 2014). A greater proportion of Nunavut adolescents reported high consumption of SSBs, as well as other energy-dense foods, when compared to adolescents in the three territories combined and in the provinces. These results confirm previous studies but provide a current and comprehensive analysis that can help inform future food and nutrition priorities and programing.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".