Correlates of children's dietary intake, physical activity and sedentary behavior in home-based childcare: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic review assessed the correlates of children's dietary intake, physical activity and sedentary behavior in home-based childcare. A systematic search of five databases with articles published between January 2000 and July 2021 was conducted. Articles were included if they contained data from a home-based childcare (birth-5 years) setting; were a quantitative study that reported children's dietary intake, physical activity or sedentary behavior; included variables associated with children's dietary intake, physical activity or sedentary behavior; and were published in English. Correlates were categorized using McLeroy's social ecological framework. Risk of bias was assessed using the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) Risk of Bias Rating Tool. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria; six assessed children's dietary intake, and nine assessed physical activity and/or sedentary behaviors. Studies were conducted in the USA (n = 12) and Canada (n = 3). Seventy-three correlates were identified, for children's dietary intake (n = 11), physical activity (n = 35) and sedentary behavior (n = 27). Ethnicity and the food provided to children were associated with children's dietary intake in two studies; both from the same study sample. Indoor play space was positively associated with physical activity in two separate studies. No consistent associations for children's dietary intake, physical activity, or sedentary behavior outcomes were found between studies, however few studies assessed the same correlates. High-quality studies conducted in different countries that assess the nutrition and physical activity environments in home-based childcare using reliable and consistent methods are needed. This review was registered with PROSPERO, no. CRD42019103429.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".