Evaluating the impact of community interventions on childhood obesity in populations living in low‐income households in Los Angeles: A simulation study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The complex multifactorial nature of childhood obesity makes community interventions difficult to evaluate using traditional approaches; innovative methods are needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of various interventions targeting childhood obesity-related behaviours, and classified as using a micro-level (e.g., home visitation programs) or macro-level (e.g., business practices) strategy, on obesity among children enrolled in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). METHODS: We simulated a population of 1500 children enrolled in WIC, with specific diet, physical activity, breastfeeding behaviours and body mass index z-scores (BMIz), following them from age 2 to 5 years. RESULTS: Combined interventions targeting breastfeeding appeared to be moderately effective, reducing BMIz by 0.03 (95% CI -005, -0.01). Two strategy-specific interventions, home visitation programs and business practices targeting obesity-related behaviours, appeared to be moderately effective at reducing BMIz by 0.04 (95% CI -0.06, -0.02) and 0.02 (95% CI -0.04, 0.00), respectively. Contrary to expectation, combining all micro and macro interventions appeared to have no impact or moderately increased the proportion of obesity/overweight among children. CONCLUSION: Interventions targeting breastfeeding behaviour were most effective when both micro and macro strategies were implemented. Interventions targeting obesity-related behaviours in general were effective for two strategies, home visitation and business practices.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".