MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408086620 · doi:10.51250/jheal.v5i1.91

Objectively-measured Environmental Support for Physical Activity, Healthy Eating, and Breastfeeding Supports in the Rural United States: A Scoping Review to Inform Opportunities for Public Health Surveillance

2025· review· en· W4408086620 on OpenAlexaff
Marilyn E. Wende, Bailey Houghtaling, Kathy Krey, Randa Lopez Morgan, M. Renée Umstattd Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Healthy Eating and Active Living · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingEnvironmental healthPublic healthPhysical activityHealthy eatingPsychologyMedicineNursingPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this scoping review was to identify objectively-measured environmental factors that impact physical activity (PA), healthy eating (HE), and/or breastfeeding practices among rural communities in the United States. A secondary aim was to assess measurement approaches for assessing rural environments and resource access. Searches, informed by a scientific librarian, occurred from February to July 2020. Grey literature was identified using Google, Google Scholar, Google government pages, public health, federal nutrition assistance program, Cooperative Extension Services, and related webpages. Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, and Agricola academic databases were selected to identify peer-reviewed research. ProQuest Global was used to identify dissertation/thesis research. Inclusion criteria included: (1) focus on PA, HE, and/or breastfeeding; (2) environmental approaches assessed using objective measures; (3) specific to U.S. rural populations/contexts; and (4) English language. PA environment results (n=49) focused on initiatives in parks and recreational settings, streets or sidewalks, schools, trails and greenways, workplaces, and churches. HE environment results (n=84) focused on initiatives in retail environments, schools/childcare settings, food assistance programs, local food producers, and hospital or healthcare settings. Breastfeeding environment results (n=11) focused on healthcare settings, workplace settings, and food retail settings. To measure PA, HE, and breastfeeding environments, audits, scans, and administrative data were mostly used. Results from this scoping review were used to create recommendations for environmental changes that may improve PA, HE, and breastfeeding in under-resourced, rural communities. Researchers and practitioners can also use findings from this study to understand best practices for objectively measuring environmental resources in rural contexts.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0170.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Healthy Eating and Active LivingSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207