MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388946672 · doi:10.3390/ijerph20237101

Technology-Based Interventions to Reduce Sugar-Sweetened Beverages among Adolescents: A Scoping Review

2023· review· en· W4388946672 on OpenAlexaff
Chidiebere Cosmas Ezike, Keith Da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionCritical appraisalThematic analysisPublic healthEnvironmental healthSystematic reviewPsychologyMEDLINEMedicineQualitative researchAlternative medicineNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This scoping review investigates the effectiveness of technology-based interventions in reducing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption among adolescents. The rise in SSB consumption among young individuals has become a global public health concern due to its association with obesity, diabetes, and various other health problems. The purpose of this scoping review is to map out and examine the various technology-based interventions used in reducing sugar-sweetened beverages among children and adolescents. A systematic search of three databases using the PRISMA guideline was followed, and 474 articles were retrieved. Seven articles met the inclusion criteria and the critical appraisal using the critical appraisal skill program (CASP). The seven articles underwent both descriptive and thematic analysis. Four technology-based interventions were identified from the selected articles, which include smartphone apps, online or web-based tools, text messages, and social marketing strategies. Our findings suggest that these interventions hold promise in improving adolescents' eating patterns and health outcomes associated with SSB intake, highlighting their potential as useful strategies in resolving this urgent public health concern.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.300
GPT teacher head0.587
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→