What Practice Issues Over 25 Years Most Interest Registered Dietitians? Survey and Interview Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
) identify possible key informants. An online bilingual survey was conducted in 2018, with follow-up phone interviews among interested respondents. Survey content was organised as 12 major topics. Respondents were invited via a Dietitians of Canada (DC) newsletter, Facebook groups, and at the DC national conference. Survey data, including respondent-generated topics of interest and interview content, were descriptively analyzed. The online survey garnered 360 responses; 332 (92%) completed more than 10% of the survey and were interested in history. Detailed responses were analyzed (296 English; 36 French); 51 were interviewed. An online timeline was the most preferred format (79%). Review of the rise in technology and obesity, aging, supermarket registered dietitians (RDs), the local/organic movement, Practice-based Evidence in Nutrition (PEN), the changes in training models and scope of practice, public awareness of the profession, and advocacy and unique career paths were of most interest (≥ 50% of respondents). These results confirm interest in the recent history of the profession among RDs and provide guidance on preferred format and topics for further work.
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 | 0.020 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".