Group-based nutrition interventions to promote healthy eating and mobility in community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective: To identify the efficacy of group-based nutrition interventions to increase healthy eating, reduce nutrition risk, improve nutritional status and improve physical mobility among community-dwelling older adults. Design: Systematic review. Electronic databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Sociological Abstracts were searched on July 15, 2020 for studies published in English since January 2010. Study selection, critical appraisal (using the Joanna Briggs Institute’s tools) and data extraction were performed in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Setting: Nutrition interventions delivered to groups in community-based settings were eligible. Studies delivered in acute or long-term care settings were excluded. Participants: Community-dwelling older adults aged 55+ years. Studies targeting specific disease populations or promoting weight loss were excluded. Results: Thirty-one experimental and quasi-experimental studies with generally unclear to high risk of bias were included. Interventions included nutrition education with behaviour change techniques (BCT) (e.g. goal setting, interactive cooking demonstrations) ( n 21), didactic nutrition education ( n 4), interactive nutrition education ( n 2), food access ( n 2) and nutrition education with BCT and food access ( n 2). Group-based nutrition education with BCT demonstrated the most promise in improving food and fluid intake, nutritional status and healthy eating knowledge compared with baseline or control. The impact on mobility outcomes was unclear. Conclusions: Group-based nutrition education with BCT demonstrated the most promise for improving healthy eating among community-dwelling older adults. Our findings should be interpreted with caution related to generally low certainty, unclear to high risk of bias and high heterogeneity across interventions and outcomes. Higher quality research in group-based nutrition education for older adults is needed.
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 | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".