Nutritional Behaviors and Perceived Barriers Among University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study was a) performed to evaluate to what degree Jordanian university students display healthy nutritional behavior, b) which socio-demographic variables impact on it, and c) to identify perceived barriers toward not eating healthy foods. METHOD: A cross-sectional descriptive survey based on a questionnaire, was completed by Jordanian university students (n =1.180). RESULTS: Students show a low level of a nutritional behaviors score (10 from 20).The most common types of food/drink consumed were caffeine drinks and the rarely or never consumed one was fish. The perceived barriers for not eating healthy food reported were: i) Healthy foods are expensive, ii) Lack of time, iii) Poor choice of healthy foods, iv) living alone at home, v) Don’t know how to cook, and vi) Don’t like/enjoy healthy foods. CONCLUSIONS: Increased nutritional awareness and healthier nutrition are needed to improve nutritional behavior because it connected with improving health status and academic achievement. Perceived barriers for not eating healthy food should be considered in planning university nutritional programs.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".