Interpersonal determinants of diet quality and eating behaviors in people aged 13–30 years: A systematic scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescence is an important period of increasing independence, when adolescents experience changing influences of family and friends on their diets as they transition into adulthood. We conducted a scoping review to map the literature on interpersonal determinants of diet quality and eating behaviors among individuals aged 13-30 years. We searched seven literature databases, and following screening, 329 papers were included. Determinants were grouped according to sub-categories of the Determinants of Nutrition and Eating framework: family structure (n = 122), social influences (n = 121), parental behaviors (n = 90), family food culture (n = 83), social support (n = 69), parental feeding styles (n = 24), parental attitudes/beliefs (n = 8), and parental resources/risk factors (n = 6), and we added two new sub-categories: parenting style (n = 74) and partner behaviors (n = 6). Fruit/vegetable (n = 143) and sugar-sweetened beverage (n = 102) intake were the most commonly measured diet outcomes, and breakfast consumption (n = 41) and fast food/takeaway intake (n = 39) the most commonly examined eating behaviors. This review highlights the gaps in the literature, both across the determinant sub-categories and also the relative paucity of longitudinal evidence and lack of evidence in emerging adults, particularly outside of university settings. Future research should focus on these areas to provide stronger evidence to support better design of interventions for this age group.
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 | 0.008 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".