Early school-age family meal characteristics matter for the later development of boys and girls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Sharing a meal together offers an innovative approach to study the family environment. How often families eat together may not capture the distinct experience for sons and daughters. Instead, studying family meal characteristics might be more enlightening. This study aims to examine the prospective associations between family meal environment quality at age 6 years and later well-being at age 12 years in 734 boys and 758 girls. Method: Participants are from the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development birth cohort. When children were aged 6 years, parents reported on their family meal environment experience. At age 12 years, child outcomes included parent-reported healthy lifestyle habits, teacher-reported academic achievement, and self-reported social adjustment. The relationship between early family meal environment quality and later child outcomes were analyzed using multivariate linear regressions. Results: For girls, better family meal environment quality at age 6 years predicted an earlier bedtime, a lower consumption of soft drinks and sweet snacks, more classroom engagement, and fewer behavior problems at age 12 years. For boys, better family meal environment quality at age 6 years predicted an earlier bedtime and less anxiety and more prosocial behaviour at age 12 years. These significant relationships were adjusted for a multitude of child/family characteristics. Conclusion: From a population-health perspective, our findings suggest that family meals represent a cost-efficient, effective protective factor that likely has long-term influences on bio-psycho-social development. Information campaigns that promote family meals as a health intervention could optimize the well-being of boys and 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".