Guelph Family Health Study’s Home-Based Obesity Prevention Intervention Increases Fibre and Fruit Intake in Preschool-Aged Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The Guelph Family Health Study (GFHS) pilot was designed to examine the feasibility and effectiveness of a home-based obesity prevention intervention on health behaviours and obesity risk. The objective of this analysis was to determine the effect of the 6-month intervention on preschool-aged children's dietary intakes. METHODS: Families with children aged 1.5-5 years old were randomized to receive one of the following: 4 home visits with a health educator as well as tailored emails and mailed incentives (4HV; n = 19 children); 2 home visits with a health educator as well as tailored emails and mailed incentives (2HV; n = 14 children); or general health advice through emails (control; n = 12 children). Three-day food records were completed by parents for their children before and after the 6-month intervention and analyzed for 3-day average intakes of energy, nutrients, and MyPlate food groups. RESULTS: After the 6-month intervention, the 4HV group had significantly higher fibre intake and the 4HV and 2HV groups had significantly higher fruit intake, both compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support for a home-based intervention approach to improve the diet quality of preschool-aged children.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".