MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415376575 · doi:10.1186/s12966-025-01837-1

Development of the Canadian food intake screener for adolescents based on Canada’s Food Guide 2019 healthy eating recommendations

2025· article· en· W4415376575 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Claire N. Tugault-Lafleur, Virginie Desgreniers, Geneviève Bessette, Rita Al Kazzi, Raphaëlle Jacob, Kimberley Hernandez, Sylvie St-Pierre, Jess Haines

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaUniversity of GuelphHealth CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaCanadian Foundation for Dietetic Research
KeywordsFood intakeClinical nutritionHealthy eatingBehavioural sciencesFood frequency questionnaireHealthy foodHealthy dietFood guide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Assessing adolescents' dietary intakes in relation to Canada's Food Guide 2019 (CFG-2019) recommendations on healthy food choices is a critical component to public health surveillance efforts. The study aimed to develop a brief self-administered screener to assess food intake based on CFG-2019 food choices recommendations among English- and French-speaking adolescents aged 10-17 years living in Canada. METHODS: The development and assessment of the content validity of the tool was undertaken in collaboration with Health Canada advisors and informed by external content experts, including nutrition researchers and practitioners. Following a rapid review of screeners used among children aged 6-17 years, an initial draft was developed, and content validity was assessed by an expert panel with expertise in public health nutrition and questionnaire validation (English n = 13, French n = 7). Two rounds of cognitive interviews were then conducted with adolescents (English n = 15, French n = 14) to assess comprehension and further refine the screener items. Cognitive testing using a direct probing approach was conducted iteratively in two phases to assess understanding of questions and incorporate feedback from adolescents to improve the clarity and wording of the items at each phase. RESULTS: Following the expert panel and iterative discussions with Health Canada advisors, four items were removed from the initial 14-item screener as these items were deemed not sufficiently reflective of the CFG recommendations and one item asking about water intake was tested. Cognitive testing revealed that the items were well understood overall, and feedback at each interview round enabled additional refinements to improve comprehension. The resulting screener includes 10 items designed to rapidly assess food intake based on CFG-2019 recommendations on healthy food choices for adolescents aged 10 to 17 years. CONCLUSIONS: The Canadian Food Intake Screener for Adolescents/Questionnaire court canadien sur les apports alimentaires des adolescents is designed to rapidly assess dietary intake over the past week among children aged 10 to 17 years. Before it can be used for research and population-level nutrition surveillance, further research is needed to develop a scoring system and evaluate the screener's construct validity and reliability.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical ActivitySame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207