MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evidências de validade da Escala de Segurança Alimentar e Nutricional para adolescentes (ESANa)

2021· article· pt· W3123357251 on OpenAlexaff
Marjorie Lima do Vale, Walberto Silva dos Santos›, José Aírton de Freitas Pontes, Renata Belizário Diniz, Maria Marlene Marques Ávila

Bibliographic record

VenueCiência & Saúde Coletiva · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood intakeHumanitiesPsychologyMedicineArtEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to develop a valid and reliable scale for assessing food and nutritional insecurity, specifically in adolescents. The initial version of the scale consisted of two subscales: perception of food insecurity and perception of nutritional security. The items were submitted to content analysis (n = 4) by a group of food and nutrition security experts, and semantic analysis (n = 20) by a group of adolescents conveniently sampled from the target population. After adjustments, the final version of the scale was applied to adolescent students (n = 425) aged 12 to 18 years (m = 14.32±0.96; CV = 6.7%). A two-factor model was the most appropriate after performing exploratory factor analysis. The subscales showed modest values of the alpha coefficient (0.69 and 0.60, respectively). Daily consumption of fruits, vegetables and soft drinks was significantly associated with higher scores in the food and nutrition security perception scale. Therefore, it is recommended to combine food access-based items with other aspects related to attitudes and behaviors towards healthy eating in order to achieve a more accurate picture of adolescent's needs and better guide public policies.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCiência & Saúde ColetivaSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207