MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399832196 · doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2024.03.011

Thirty Years of SNAP-Ed: The Transition of the Nation's Largest Nutrition Education Program Into a Pillar of the Public Health Infrastructure

2024· article· en· W4399832196 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kimberly Keller, Pamela Bruno, Susan Foerster, Carrie Draper

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nutrition Education and Behavior · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPillarSnapSupplemental Nutrition Assistance ProgramPolitical sciencePublic healthGerontologyEconomic growthMedicineGeographyEngineeringNursingArchaeologyComputer scienceEconomicsFood insecurity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the 30-year evolution of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program-Education (SNAP-Ed) to provide evidence to support our perspective that SNAP-Ed has earned its position as a pillar of the public health infrastructure in the US. Legislatively designated as a nutrition education and obesity prevention program, its focus is the nearly 90 million Americans with limited income. This audience experiences ongoing health disparities and is disproportionately affected by public health crises. The SNAP-Ed program works to reduce nutrition-related health disparities at all levels of the Social-Ecological Model, follows a robust evaluation framework, and leverages strong partnerships between state-based practitioners, state agencies, and the US Department of Agriculture. The expansion of SNAP-Ed would enable the program to reach more Americans so that our nation can end hunger and reduce diet-related health disparities.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nutrition Education and Behavior→Same topicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations→French-language works237,207→