Are closed campus policies associated with youth eating behaviours?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose The effectiveness of school nutrition regulations may be undermined by the food environment surrounding schools, particularly among adolescents, as they are less likely to eat lunch at school and have their own spending money. Given challenges in regulating the external food retail, policies where students are unable to leave the school property during the day have been suggested to improve student nutrition. The aim of this study was to examine whether closed campus policies (CCP) are associated with student eating behaviours. Methods The current study used student- and school-administrator survey data from 60,610 grade 9-12 students and 134 Canadian secondary schools participating in year 7 (2018/2019) of the COMPASS study. Multiple ordinal regression models tested school CCP as a predictor of weekday dietary behaviours (0-5 days), controlling for student- (grade, gender, spending money, ethnicity) and school-level (urbanicity, province, area median household income, school vending machines) covariates. Results A total of 16 schools reported CCP. Students who attended schools with CCP reported eating lunch purchased from fast food places or restaurants on fewer weekdays, but consumed sugar sweetened beverages (sodas/sports drinks or sweetened coffee/tea drinks) and snacks purchased from school vending machines on more weekdays, relative to students at schools with open campus policies. No significant differences in student reports of eating lunch brought from home, eating lunch purchased from the school cafeteria, or snacks purchased off-school campus were observed between schools with open and CCP. Conclusion CCP may help improve youth eating behaviour by reducing sugar sweetened beverages and lunch time fast food consumption on weekdays; however, students already purchasing food may shift from off-campus to within school options, highlighting the importance of ensuring healthy school food environments and encouraging students to bring home-prepared lunches. Future studies using experimental longitudinal designs are needed to determine the effect of school CCP on various health behaviours and outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".