Exploring contexts for using digital food retail services in Canada: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to understand contexts for buying food online with food delivery apps, meal kits, and online grocers in Canada. A total of 34 participants (24% identified as men) between the ages of 16 and 60 were interviewed over the phone. The participants were recruited through personal and professional networks, electronic word of mouth, and paid social media ads. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was used to generate major themes: convenience, food literacy, and cost-effectiveness. Convenience was multifaceted, including protecting time, minimizing food preparation effort, and facilitating food access (without a vehicle, during illness and isolation, during bad weather, with mobility challenges, or while consuming drugs or alcohol). It was found that regardless of age, gender, or lifestyle, the contexts for using digital food retail services were similar. These services made food acquisition and preparation easier; however, the benefits may be at the detriment to food literacy. The added value that digital food retail services provided made up for any additional costs. This study highlighted the need for public health practitioners to consider different facets of convenience and the added value that digital food retail services offer when making healthy food shopping and preparation recommendations. Additionally, further investigation into the impacts of digital food retail on food literacy is warranted. Results from this study will be integrated into a larger survey exploring the relationship between online food purchasing behaviors and diet quality among Canadians.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".