MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4285729246 · doi:10.2196/35553

Exploring the Use of a Web-Based Menu Planning Tool in Childcare Services: Qualitative Cross-sectional Survey Study

2022· article· en· W4285729246 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jessica V Kempler, Penelope Love, Kristy A. Bolton, Margaret Rozman, Alison C. Spence

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisUsabilityPerceptionQualitative researchPsychologyAffect (linguistics)PlannerKnowledge managementApplied psychologyNursingMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Early childhood is a critical period for supporting the development of healthy eating habits, which may affect lifelong health. Childcare services are important settings for promoting early childhood nutrition; however, food provision in childcare frequently does not align with dietary guidelines. Web-based menu planning tools are well suited to support healthy food provision in childcare, although little is known about their use. Research is needed to understand how web-based menu planning tools are used in the childcare setting and how they can effectively support healthy menu planning and food provision for children in childcare. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore the use of a web-based menu planning tool called FoodChecker, which is available to childcare services in Victoria, Australia. We also aimed to gain insights and perspectives from childcare staff involved in menu planning about their use of the tool to plan healthy menus and guide healthy food provision for children. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study using a cross-sectional web-based survey completed by the staff involved in menu planning in childcare services. Thematic analysis was performed using NVivo software. Emergent themes were mapped against constructs of the Technology Acceptance Model regarding perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and external variables influencing perceptions and use. RESULTS: The participants included 30 cooks and 34 directors from 53 childcare services. Participants perceived the web-based menu planning tool as useful for supporting child nutrition and health, improving organizational processes, and aiding the menu planner role. Perceptions regarding ease of use were mixed. External variables influencing perceptions and use included awareness of the tool, perceived need, time, resources, organizational support, and the food budget. Participants made recommendations to improve the tool, particularly the need to integrate functionality to make it easier and faster to use or to include more links to resources to support healthy menu planning. CONCLUSIONS: The web-based menu planning tool was perceived as useful for cooks and directors in childcare services. Areas for improvement were identified; for example, the need for integrated digital features to make the tool easier and faster to use. As the first qualitative study to explore childcare staff experiences with a web-based menu planning tool, these findings inform future research and development of such tools to aid scalable and sustainable support for healthier food provision in the childcare sector.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.415
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.087 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet→French-language works237,207→