Nutritional quality of the food choices of Canadian children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The release of the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS), Nutrition 2015 provides a unique opportunity since CCHS 2004 to investigate food choices of Canadian children and adolescents at a national level. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the quality and quantity of food choices of children ages 2-8 years and adolescents 9-18 years, using Health Canada's Surveillance Tool Tier System 2014. It is hypothesized that Canadian children and adolescents are consuming diets poor in nutritional quality based on evidence from the last national nutrition survey in 2004. DESIGN: Intakes from CCHS 2015, 24-h dietary recall were categorized into Health Canada's Tiers 1-4, based on CNF/CFG classification system and thresholds for nutrients to limit i.e., total fat, saturated fats, sugars, and sodium to assess quality of food choices. Additionally, dietary intakes were grouped according to Canada's 2007 food guide servings as the 2019 food guide was not available. RESULTS: Majority of foods reported by children 2-18 years were categorized as Tier 2 and Tier 3 foods. Investigation of energy contributions from the Tier 4 and "other foods" represented 21-25% of daily calorie intake and of these foods, high fat and/or high sugar foods contributed majority of daily calories to these categories. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed Canadian children 2-18 years are consuming diets high in nutrients recommended to limit. Evidence from this study provides a unique opportunity to improve the nutritional quality of foods, and the food choices of children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".