On successfully avoiding communication inequalities and instilling positive impacts: The experience of the 2012–2016 WIXX campaign in Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Communication campaigns can contribute to promoting physical activity (PA) among children. However, health inequalities can ensue from this type of public health intervention. Using a pre-test posttest design, we examined the effects of social disadvantage on the large-scale WIXX communication campaign and whether or not social disadvantage moderated WIXX's impact on PA. Parents of youths were identified using random digit dialing procedures and asked permission for their child to participate in a telephone survey. Surveys were conducted each year between 2012 and 2016. Moderating effects of individual-level and area-based indicators of social disadvantage on campaign effectiveness were examined. Self-reported levels of PA and trying new PAs were the outcomes. Exposure was defined as a function of ads recall and brand awareness. Logistic regression analyses controlling for survey periods, screen time, language, school grade, and attitudes toward PA were performed in 2020. Among girls, no significant interaction effects were observed for household income, parental education, and material deprivation. A significant interaction effect was observed for minority group status on PA (OR = 2.4; 95%CIs: 1.2, 4.9) and trying of new activities (OR = 2.5; 95%CIs: 1.2, 5.1). A significant interaction effect between social deprivation and exposure was observed for trying new activities among girls (OR = 1.8; 95%CIs: 1.0, 3.2). Among boys, no significant interaction effects were observed for any indicators. Results suggest no clear evidence of communication inequalities as a result of the WIXX campaign but reveal positive impacts of the campaign among more socially disadvantaged girls.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".