Parental Cooking Confidence is Associated with Children’s Intake of Fish and Seafood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Fish and seafood consumption by North American children is low. This is concerning, given the critical role of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid), found in fish and seafood, in early development. This study aimed to determine whether parental factors related to fish and seafood consumption are associated with frequency of fish and seafood consumption in Canadian children. Methods: A subgroup of parents (n = 28) participating in the Guelph Family Health Study Pilot reported their perceptions and history of fish and seafood consumption, confidence in preparing fish and seafood dishes, and the frequency of intake for their children (n = 40). Results: This study found that 20% of children consumed one serving of saltwater fish, freshwater fish, or shellfish weekly and 63% consumed at least one type of fish or seafood monthly. Parental cooking confidence preparing fish and seafood was positively associated with at least monthly fish and seafood intake in children. Conclusions: These findings suggest that some children may have low intakes of fish and seafood due to a lack of parental cooking confidence when preparing fish and seafood dishes. Therefore, future research and interventions focused on addressing this barrier may aid in improving fish and seafood intake.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".