The <i>Eating with Ease</i> Program Improved Veterinary Medical Students’ Perceived Ability to Buy, Cook, and Eat Healthy Foods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
College students are challenged to consume healthy diets, and veterinary medical students may also have difficulty achieving optimal dietary intake, yet improved well-being is associated with following healthy dietary patterns. Individuals with food literacy—the inter-related knowledge, skills, and behaviors to plan and manage, select, prepare, and eat healthy foods—are better able to meet dietary recommendations. The Eating with Ease program developed and tested a nutrition education/culinary skill-building program to build first- and second-year veterinary medicine students’ food literacy and healthy behaviors toward food. The curriculum emphasized health and nutrition, taste, food preparation skills, planning/decision making, and convenience. Students engaged in four 30-minute sessions and communicated through a mobile group messaging application. Pre- and post-program scores on the Eating and Food Literacy Behaviors Questionnaire (EFLBQ) were compared between those who finished the intervention and a control group of graduate students who completed a money management program. The intervention group ( n = 23) had a mean age of 24.2 years ( SD = 2.6), and the control group ( n = 14) had a mean age of 27.1 years ( SD = 2.3). Most participants were female (87%, n = 20 and 79%, n = 11 in the intervention and control groups, respectively). After completing the program, the veterinary medical students’ mean EFLBQ factor change score for health and nutrition was significantly higher ( p = .03) when compared to the control group. These findings suggest that a short, evidence-based nutrition education/culinary skill-building program may improve veterinary medical students’ behaviors to choose, prepare and consume healthy foods.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".