Considerations for diverse, equitable, and inclusive school food programs in the USA and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
School food programs have been shown to support the nutrition of children and their long-term health outcomes in tandem with reducing nutritional inequities experienced by low-income, food insecure, and racialized populations. Understanding the specific needs and outcomes of these equity-deserving groups is crucial when enhancing program implementation and participation in school food programs. A scoping review of equitable, diverse, and inclusive considerations for school food programs was conducted on Canadian and American peer-reviewed and grey literature. The search strategy identified 18 peer-reviewed publications and three grey literature reports that supported the creation of five themes to be explored for school food programs: universal access, food preparation and delivery, sociocultural food preferences, partner involvement, and equitable nutrition. Analysis revealed that while literature surrounding these themes is developing, they serve as a crucial starting point for further research and consideration of the enhancement of school food programs. These themes can support the delivery of a program that is accessible to all students, accommodates their individualized needs, and is free of stigma.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".