MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163649373 · doi:10.3390/ijerph18105485

The Impact of COVID-19 on Canada’s Food Literacy: Results of a Cross-National Survey

2021· article· en· W3163649373 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvain Charlebois, Janet Music, Shannon Faires

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCulinary Culture and Tourism
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicLiteracyContext (archaeology)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Political sciencePublic relationsEconomic growthGeographyMedicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies of food literacy emphasise the acquisition of critical knowledge over context. This evaluation looks at how COVID-19 impacted food literacy in a country affected by the global pandemic. To our knowledge, there has been no systematic research that would allow a better understanding of the impact of uncertainty or enhanced perceived risks generated by a global crisis on the prevalence of household food literacy. This study looks at food literacy from a perceptive of how an event that has domesticated many of them can alter knowledge and the relationship people have with food. A cross-national survey including 10,004 Canadians was conducted ten months after the start of the pandemic. Results show that Canadians have learned new recipes. Canadians have also taken up gardening and have relied on several sources to gather information. This study provides some evidence that Canadians have become more food literate because of the COVID-19 pandemic, but less significantly than anticipated. Practical and policy implications are presented as well as some future research directions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicCulinary Culture and TourismFrench-language works237,207