Comparison between the Healthy Start-Départ Santé online and in-person training of childcare educators to improve healthy eating and physical activity practices and knowledge of physical activity and fundamental movement skills: A controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Online training may be a more effective and sustainable way to reach educators in early childcare centres (ECCs). This study compared the effectiveness of an online version of the Healthy Start-Départ Santé (HSDS) training to the traditional in-person version of the training as well as to the usual practice condition on ECC educators’ healthy eating (HE) and physical activity (PA) practices and knowledge of PA and fundamental movement skills (FMS). Seventy-eight ECCs were randomly chosen across the provinces of New Brunswick and Saskatchewan, Canada and were allocated to either the online training, the in-person training or the usual practice groups between 2013 and 2018. Educators in each group completed a self-administered questionnaire before and nine months after the intervention, which included questions regarding their HE and PA practices in the ECC, as well as their knowledge of children’s FMS and PA. Group differences were assessed with mixed-effect models. Compared to educators in the usual practice group, educators in the online training group reported a greater improvement in scores for HE and PA practices (p = 0.03 and 0.03, respectively), but change for educators in the in-person training group were not different (p = 0.8 and 0.56, respectively). The rate of improvement in FMS and PA knowledge did not differ across all three groups (p = 0.9). The HSDS online training is an effective method of improving educators’ HE and PA practices in ECCs. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02375490)
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".