Adolescent perspectives of the recreational ice hockey food environment and influences on eating behaviour revealed through photovoice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Unhealthy dietary behaviours are prevalent among adolescents. This might relate, in part, to obesogenic environments, including recreation food facilities. The REFRESH Study (Recreation Environment and Food Research: Experiences from Hockey) aimed to explore, from the perspectives of adolescent ice hockey players and parents, broad social and physical environmental influences on adolescent food behaviours associated with hockey participation. DESIGN: Players used photovoice to describe their food experiences in relation to ice hockey. The approach included photos, individual interviews and focus groups. Exemplar photographs were exhibited for stakeholders, including five parents who were interviewed. Interview and focus group transcripts were thematically analysed. SETTING: Recreational ice hockey environment, Ontario, Canada, 2015-16. SUBJECTS: Ice hockey players (n 24) aged 11-15 years recruited from five leagues. RESULTS: Dominant influences among players included: their perceived importance of nutrients (e.g. protein) or foods (e.g. chocolate milk) for performance and recovery; marketing and branding (e.g. the pro-hockey aura of Tim Horton's®, Canada's largest quick-service restaurant); social aspects of tournaments and team meals; and moral values around 'right' and 'wrong' food choices. Both players and parents perceived recreational facility food options as unhealthy and identified that travel and time constraints contributed to less healthy choices. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate recreation facilities are only one of a range of environments that influence eating behaviours of adolescent ice hockey players. Players' susceptibility to advertising/brand promotion and the value of healthy food choices for performance are findings that can inform policy and interventions to support healthy environments and behaviours.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".