Beliefs Related to Participation in a Large Web-Based Prospective Survey on Diet and Health Among Individuals With a Low Socioeconomic Status: Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: NutriQuébec is a Web-based prospective study on the relationship between diet and health as well as the impact of food-related health policies in the adult population of Québec, Canada. Recruitment and retention of individuals with a low socioeconomic status (SES) in such a study are known to be challenging, yet critical for achieving representativeness of the entire population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the behavioral, normative, and control beliefs of individuals with a low SES regarding participation in the NutriQuébec project and to identify their preferences regarding recruitment methods. METHODS: A total of four focus groups were conducted in community centers located in low-income areas of Québec City, Canada. On the basis of the theory of planned behavior, participants' beliefs associated with attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control regarding hypothetical participation in the NutriQuébec project were identified. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed, and coded by two analysts. RESULTS: Participants (16 men and 12 women) were aged between 28 and 72 years, and a majority of the participants had an annual household income of Can $19,999 or less. The main perceived advantages of participating in the NutriQuébec project were contributing to improved collective health and supporting research. The only disadvantage identified was the risk of having to fill out too many questionnaires. Participants could not, in general, identify persons from their entourage who would approve or disapprove their participation in the study. The main facilitators identified were obtaining a brief health assessment and the ability to complete questionnaires in a way that is not Web-based. The main barrier was the lack of internet access. The preferred means of recruitment were through social media, television, and community centers. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide insightful information regarding the best methods and messages to use in order to recruit and retain individuals with a low SES in a population-based prospective study on lifestyle and health on the internet.
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 | 0.138 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".