School Feeding for Improving the Physical and Psychosocial Health of Disadvantaged Students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of school feeding programs in improving physical and psychosocial health for disadvantaged school pupils. A comprehensive search was conducted up to May 2006. We included 18 studies. School meals may have some small benefits for disadvantaged children. We recommend further well‐designed studies on the effectiveness of school meals be undertaken, that results should be reported according to socio‐economic status, and that researchers gather robust data on both processes and carefully chosen outcomes. Abstract Background Early malnutrition and/or micronutrient deficiencies can adversely affect physical, mental, and social aspects of child health. School feeding programs are designed to improve attendance, achievement, growth, and other health outcomes. Objectives The main objective was to determine the effectiveness of school feeding programs in improving physical and psychosocial health for disadvantaged school pupils. Search strategy We searched a number of databases including CENTRAL (2006 Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2006), EMBASE (1980 to May 2006), PsycINFO (1980 to May 2006) and CINAHL (1982 to May 2006). Grey literature sources were also searched. Reference lists of included studies and key journals were handsearched and we also contacted selected experts in the field. Selection criteria Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non‐randomised controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs), and interrupted time series studies (ITSs) were included. Feeding had to be done in school; the majority of participants had to be socio‐economically disadvantaged. Data collection & analysis Two reviewers assessed all searches and retrieved studies. Data extraction was done by one of four reviewers and reviewed by a second. Two reviewers independently rated quality. If sufficient data were available, they were synthesized using random effects meta‐analysis, adjusting for clustering if needed. Analyses were performed separately for RCTs and CBAs and for higher and lower income countries. Main results We included 18 studies. For weight, in the RCTs and CBAs from Lower Income Countries, experimental group children gained an average of 0.39 kg (95% C.I: 0.11 to 0.67) over an average of 19 months and 0.71 kg (95% C.I.: 0.48 to 0.95) over 11.3 months respectively. Results for weight were mixed in higher income countries. For height, results were mixed; height gain was greater for younger children. Attendance in lower income countries was higher in experimental groups than in controls; our results show an average increase of 4 to 6 days a year. Math gains were consistently higher for experimental groups in lower income countries; in CBAs, the Standardized Mean Difference was 0.66 (95% C.I. = 0.13 to 1.18). In short‐term studies, small improvements in some cognitive tasks were found. Reviewers’ conclusions School meals may have some small benefits for disadvantaged children. We recommend further well‐designed studies on the effectiveness of school meals be undertaken, that results should be reported according to socio‐economic status, and that researchers gather robust data on both processes and carefully chosen outcomes.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 it