Nutrition Knowledge Is Associated With Diet Quality Among US Army Soldiers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Examine the relationship between nutrition knowledge, diet quality, and eating behavior among active-duty US Army Soldiers. METHODS: Cross-sectional study with data collection in February 2018 via paper surveys during the validation of the Military Eating Behavior Survey. RESULTS: Among 440 US Army Soldiers, nutrition knowledge was positively and significantly associated with diet quality (b = 0.29, P < 0.001). For every 1-point increase in nutrition knowledge, the Healthy Eating Index-2015 score was expected to increase by 0.29 points. Nutrition knowledge was not significantly associated with skipping breakfast (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.04) or dining out (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.03). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The outcomes of this study warrant further investigation to determine what interventions provide the strongest outcomes for improving nutrition knowledge and diet quality, as well as create and support an environment that enhances healthy behaviors regarding nutrition that lead to improved diet quality among active-duty Soldiers.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".