MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307269962 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.1039419

Editorial: COVID-19 pandemic, food behaviour and consumption patterns

2022· editorial· en· W4307269962 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tarek Ben Hassen, Hamid El Bilali, Mohammad Sadegh Allahyari, Siniša Berjan

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2022
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicPublic health2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Consumption (sociology)Environmental healthMedicinePolitical scienceVirologySociologyNursingInfectious disease (medical specialty)Outbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With already 600 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 and over 6 million recorded deaths, the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), detected in Wuhan (China) in late 2019, is nowadays one of the most pressing global challenges facing humanity. In addition to significantly impacting health systems, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted food systems from farm to fork, with consequences for food and nutrition security at all levels (global, national, local, and individual). While a growing corpus of research examines the pandemic's disruption of food supply networks, the implications regarding food environments and consumer behavior are still widely overlooked, particularly in developing countries. Accordingly, this Research Topic intends to offer insight into the pandemic's influence on food buying behavior, nutrition, and eating habits and the consequences of these changes. It includes 10 papers on various issues (diet, food security, food affordability, food safety, shopping habits, food waste, etc.) and geographical areas (Oman, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Italy, Canada, and India).

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0150.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.016

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207