An interactive after-school nutrition and culinary education program for primary school students: The evaluation and efficacy of changing food-related knowledge, attitudes and behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of a 10-week afterschool nutrition and culinary education program in changing the culinary and nutritional behaviour, attitudes and knowledge of its 9-11-year-old participants, as assessed by parents and children. 
 Methods: Retrospective matched-pairs analysis of secondary pre-post survey data collected by Boîte à Lunch (BàL). Children (n=165-197; grades 4 and 5) and parents (n=53-57) who signed-up for the BàL workshops. The program was comprised of ten-week (2 hours/week) bilingual (French and English) themed sessions led by trained educators with focus on culinary skill development, nutrition education and hands-on cooking. Secondary objectives include: team-work, kitchen hygiene, compost, understanding of food systems. Workshops were held in community centres and schools in Montreal, Canada. Changes were analyzed using the expanded exact McNemar-Bowker test with a Bonferroni-adjusted significance level of 0.001631.
 Results: Culinary skill and knowledge improved based on all 23 measures (all p<0.001631). Of the six measures assessed for change in attitude, three were significantly improved. Of the two items used to asses a change of behaviour, one was significantly improved. 2 stand-alone post-workshop questions suggest a positive trend for improvements in each.
 Conclusion: Knowledge and culinary skill of youth can be improved through nutrition education and hands-on cooking. Culinary and nutritional attitudes and behaviours may be improved; further research is needed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".