MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract MP005: Do Worksite Wellness Programs Improve Dietary Behaviors and Adiposity? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2017· review· en· W2949356945 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Lifestyle Studies
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicineFunnel plotWaistObesityPublication biasRandom effects modelRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Worksites are promising venues for promoting health, given considerable time spent at work and opportunities for environmental change. Yet, the impact of worksite wellness programs (WWPs) on diet and adiposity, as well as the most relevant WWP components, are not established. Methods: Following MOOSE and PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of multi-component WWP trials (RCT or quasi-experimental) on diet and adiposity. Data were extracted in duplicate and pooled using inverse variance random effects meta-analysis. Pre-specified sources of heterogeneity (study design, world region, worksite type, duration, WWP components) were analyzed by meta-regression and subgroup analysis. Funnel plots, Begg’s, and Egger’s tests evaluated potential publication bias. Results: From 6612 abstracts, we identified 48 studies assessing WWPs and diet or adiposity. Most were in the US (54%) or Europe (23%), with diet (64%) and exercise/weight loss (20%) as main targets. Intervention components were variable (Figure). Most common outcomes were intakes of fruits and vegetables (F&V) (19 studies), total fat or fat subtypes (18), and dietary fiber (4); and BMI (35) and waist circumference (WC) (10). Median duration was 12 months (range: 1-48 mo). In pooled analyses, WWP increased intake of F&V, especially fruits (Figure). Significant effects were not identified for dietary fiber, total fat, or fat subtypes. WWP also reduced BMI (Figure) and WC (-2.03 cm, 95% CI:-3.88,-0.20). Trial duration significantly modified effects on BMI (<12 mo duration: -0.64 kg/m 2 ; 12+ mo: -0.16 kg/m 2 ; P-interaction=0.046); but not WC or F&V intake. Additional findings for heterogeneity, including WWP components, and publication bias will be presented. Conclusions: These novel findings support effectiveness of WWP for increasing F&V and reducing BMI and WC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.302
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it