MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135432799 · doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdab022

Content analysis of Netflix and Amazon Prime Instant Video original films in the UK for alcohol, tobacco and junk food imagery

2021· article· en· W3135432799 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Khaldoon Alfayad, Rachael L Murray, John Britton, Alexander B Barker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCulinary Culture and Tourism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaCancer Research UK
KeywordsAmazon rainforestInstantHFSSAdvertisingAlcoholMedicineEnvironmental healthFood scienceComputer scienceBusinessTelecommunicationsChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Exposure to alcohol, tobacco and high fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) food imagery is a significant risk factor for the uptake and regular use of these products in young people, and imagery are more frequently portrayed in video-on-demand (VOD) than in terrestrial television programmes. This study compared alcohol, tobacco and HFSS imagery in original films on Amazon Prime Instant Video and Netflix. METHODS: Content analysis of 11 original films released by Amazon Prime and Netflix in 2017 using 5-minute interval coding of alcohol, tobacco and HFSS content. Proportions of intervals containing alcohol, tobacco and HFSS imagery were compared between services using the chi-square test. RESULTS: Alcohol content appeared in 200 (41.7%) out of the total of 479 intervals coded, whereas tobacco and HFSS appeared in 129 (26.9%) and 169 (35.24%), respectively. Proportions were similar between Amazon Prime Instant Video and Netflix original films and were unrelated to film age classification. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol, tobacco and HFSS content likely to promote consumption among young people occurs frequently in original films shown by VOD services in the UK. Further studies are needed to investigate effective regulatory frameworks for VOD services to protect viewers from harmful or unwanted contents.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public HealthSame topicCulinary Culture and TourismFrench-language works237,207