MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3126146198 · doi:10.3390/ijerph18030940

Healthy Dietary Choices and Physical Activity Participation in the Canadian Arctic: Understanding Nunavut Inuit Perspectives on the Barriers and Enablers

2021· article· en· W3126146198 on OpenAlexaffabout
Victor O. Akande, Timothy O. Fawehinmi, Robert A. C. Ruiter, Stef Kremers

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Nunavut
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisPhysical activityPsychological interventionArcticQualitative researchEnvironmental healthObesityGerontologyPsychologyMedicineGeographySociologyNursingEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Research shows that unhealthy diets and low physical activity are associated with high rates of obesity-linked chronic diseases amongst Nunavut Inuit. To provide contextual insights and deepen our understanding of the factors that underlie these lifestyle choices, we explored the perspectives of Nunavut Inuit on the barriers and enablers of healthy diets and physical activity participation in the community of Iqaluit. METHODS: One-on-one semi-structured photo-elicitation interviews were conducted with 16 participants of 18 years and over (10 women, six men). The interviews uncovered the participants' perspectives on the factors influencing healthy diets and physical activity in their community. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and uploaded to QSR NVIVO Version 12. Data analysis was achieved using an inductive thematic approach. RESULTS: Six main factors were identified as barriers or enablers to energy balance-related behaviors: cost and affordability of healthy choices; availability of traditional foods and activities; weather conditions and climate change; infrastructure and community resources; social networks of family and friends; and effect of substance use. CONCLUSION: This study identified six broad areas that should be considered while mapping out interventions to reduce the burden of obesity-related chronic diseases in Nunavut communities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.198
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.267 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health→Same topicIndigenous Studies and Ecology→French-language works237,207→