Use of the School Setting During the Summer Holidays: Mixed‐Methods Evaluation of Food and Fun Clubs in Wales
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: School summer holiday clubs in deprived areas of Wales were evaluated to examine opportunities for healthy eating and physical activity and explore delivery processes. METHODS: Ten Food and Fun clubs participated in 2016. Quantitative data (child and parent surveys; N = 196, N = 84) assessed the opportunity to provide children with breakfast and lunch. A sub-sample of children wore an accelerometer (N = 41) to evaluate the opportunity for achieving 1-hour of moderate to vigorous activity (MVPA) at club. Features of successful club delivery were identified through; focus groups (child and parent; N = 74, N = 69) and interviews (staff/volunteer; N = 32). RESULTS: Opportunities for healthy eating were delivered with high fidelity: 86% of children reported breakfast consumption and 75% eating a healthy lunch. On club days, children reported consuming fewer sugary snacks (66%), fewer sugary drinks (81%), and more fruits and vegetables (67%). About 71% of children achieved the recommended MVPA at club, with children engaging in more MVPA (+17 minutes/day, p < .01) on average compared to non-club days. Successful delivery processes were: use of school facilities and staff; flexible partnership-working; and whole family involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Schools appear to provide a suitable setting for the delivery of healthy eating and physical activity opportunities during school summer holidays.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it