MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000232423 · doi:10.3390/nu12020384

Using Group Model Building to Describe the System Driving Unhealthy Eating and Identify Intervention Points: A Participatory, Stakeholder Engagement Approach in the Caribbean

2020· article· en· W3000232423 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMedical Research CouncilInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)StakeholderMalnutritionCitizen journalismBusinessEnvironmental healthMedicinePsychologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthPublic relationsEconomicsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many Small Island Developing States of the Caribbean experience a triple burden of malnutrition with high rates of obesity, undernutrition in children, and iron deficiency anemia in women of reproductive age, driven by an inadequate, unhealthy diet. This study aimed to map the complex dynamic systems driving unhealthy eating and to identify potential points for intervention in three dissimilar countries. Stakeholders from across the food system in Jamaica (n = 16), St. Kitts and Nevis (n = 19), and St. Vincent and the Grenadines (n = 6) engaged with researchers in two group model building (GMB) workshops in 2018. Participants described and mapped the system driving unhealthy eating, identified points of intervention, and created a prioritized list of intervention strategies. Stakeholders were also interviewed before and after the workshops to provide their perspectives on the utility of this approach. Stakeholders described similar underlying systems driving unhealthy eating across the three countries, with a series of dominant feedback loops identified at multiple levels. Participants emphasized the importance of the relative availability and price of unhealthy foods, shifting cultural norms on eating, and aggressive advertising from the food industry as dominant drivers. They saw opportunities for governments to better regulate advertising, disincentivize unhealthy food options, and bolster the local agricultural sector to promote food sovereignty. They also identified the need for better coordinated policy making across multiple sectors at national and regional levels to deliver more integrated approaches to improving nutrition. GMB proved to be an effective tool for engaging a highly diverse group of stakeholders in better collective understanding of a complex problem and potential interventions.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.583
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.127 · 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