The Effectiveness of the Foodbot Factory Mobile Serious Game on Increasing Nutrition Knowledge in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interactive and engaging nature of serious games (i.e., video games designed for educational purposes) enables deeper learning and facilitates behavior change; however, most do not specifically support the dissemination of national dietary guidelines, and there are limited data on their impact on child nutrition knowledge. The Foodbot Factory serious game mobile application was developed to support school children in learning about Canada’s Food Guide; however, its impacts on nutrition knowledge have not been evaluated. The objective of this study was to determine if Foodbot Factory effectively improves children’s knowledge of Canada’s Food Guide, compared to a control group (control app). This study was a single-blinded, parallel, randomized controlled pilot study conducted among children ages 8–10 years attending Ontario Tech University day camps. Compared to the control group (n = 34), children who used Foodbot Factory (n = 39) had significant increases in overall nutrition knowledge (10.3 ± 2.9 to 13.5 ± 3.8 versus 10.2 ± 3.1 to 10.4 ± 3.2, p < 0.001), and in Vegetables and Fruits (p < 0.001), Protein Foods (p < 0.001), and Whole Grain Foods (p = 0.040) sub-scores. No significant difference in knowledge was observed in the Drinks sub-score. Foodbot Factory has the potential to be an effective educational tool to support children in learning about nutrition.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".