Completion rates for ecological momentary assessments of food intake during pregnancy and postpartum (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The collection of dietary behavior data is crucial in childbearing populations. In addition to observed inequities in perinatal dietary intake and quality, burdensome assessment methods (eg, 24-h dietary recall) may limit research participation for some groups. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is associated with reduced recall bias and participant convenience, but there is a dearth of studies with diverse cohorts. Objective: Our aim is to describe participant completion of food intake items in EMA surveys, overall and across individual characteristics (eg, prepregnancy BMI). Methods: Using secondary EMA data from participants in a longitudinal study, we report average completion rates of survey items regarding dietary behavior (eg, number of meals eaten in a day) across individual demographic variables (eg, age) and combined strata (eg, race+age) during late pregnancy and throughout 12 months post partum. Results: In our analytic sample (N=310), the average completion rate was 52.4% (SD 27.8%) during pregnancy, rising to 59.1% (SD 22.0%) after giving birth. Participants who were older (>30 y), overweight before pregnancy, self-identified as White, working, or earning higher annual income (>US $50,000) had higher average completion rates than their counterparts. Examining combined strata, we found some variation in survey completion within racial groups. Black participants using a study phone had higher average completion rates during pregnancy and post partum, but this relationship was reversed for White participants. Conclusions: Our secondary analysis showed relatively stable engagement with EMA surveys in a childbearing cohort across 15 months. Increased completion rates among privileged groups (eg, White, higher income) may demonstrate the impact of socioeconomic advantages on individual health behaviors. Investigators should consider how intersections between race and other factors (eg, employment) may impact participation and data collection.
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 | 0.011 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".