Re-orientating Dietetic Interventions for Adults with Eating and Weight Concerns: A Qualitative Study of the Well Now course – Part II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research examines the impact of attending a Well Now course on participants’ wellbeing and contrasts this with their reports of previous experiences of seeking support with weight concerns. The Well Now course teaches health-gain and body respect. As such, it offers people a way of making sense of their experiences around food and eating that is premised on criticality, compassion and respect. This is the second of two articles discussing research findings. This was a qualitative, community-based study using semi-structured interviews and focus groups. The participants were women and men who had completed a six session Well Now course. Interviews and focus groups were recorded and transcribed verbatim and data were manually sorted. Coding categories were developed and participants’ quotes were assigned to these using thematic analysis. The study had ethics approval. Participants described how engaging with the Well Now philosophy in a supportive group had beneficially impacted their sense of wellbeing and self-worth. The reorientation made available through Well Now enhanced psychosocial variables and behaviours known to impact on health, such as mood, self-esteem, eating/exercise habits and interpersonal relationships. They recounted instances where recommendations to follow a weight-corrective approach, and attendant size bias seen in health practitioner’s attitudes, had had a detrimental impact on their wellbeing and sense of self-worth. A professional commitment to socio-politically aware practice, such as Well Now, is recommended as a means of advancing equity, helping people heal from body shame and meeting our ethical responsibilities as health practitioners.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".