Consumption of ultra-processed and minimally processed foods by eating location and occasion in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is mounting evidence about the negative dietary, health, and environmental impacts associated with high consumption of ultra-processed food and drink products (UPF) and low consumption of unprocessed or minimally processed foods and drinks (MPF). Eating context, including eating location and occasion, can influence food intake. This cross-sectional study used the most recent available national-level data for Canada to describe how consumption of UPF and MPF varied according to eating location and occasion. Data and methods: The 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey - Nutrition provided 24-hour dietary recall data for Canadians aged 2 and older residing in the 10 Canadian provinces (n=20,080). Food and drink items were categorized using the NOVA classification. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize UPF and MPF consumption, as a percentage of energy intake, across four common eating locations (home, institution, restaurant, and other) and eating occasions (breakfast, lunch, dinner, and snack), overall and by age group. Results: In 2015, overall, Canadians consumed most of their total daily energy at home (70.1%), and dinner accounted for 33.1% of energy intake. Meals consumed at home and in institutions (e.g., school, work) generally provided lower proportions of energy from UPF and higher proportions of energy from MPF compared with restaurants and "other" locations, with some variation by eating occasion and age group. Dinner consumed at home had the most favourable profile in terms of type of processing (overall, 30.6% of energy from UPF and 53.9% from MPF relative to total at-home dinner energy content). UPF intake in restaurants, as a proportion of energy consumed in restaurants, was high for all age groups (over 50% of energy), particularly for children and adolescents (over 65% of energy). Interpretation: Eating location and occasion matter in terms of UPF and MPF energy intakes. These findings can inform the design of policies and programs aiming to encourage and support healthy eating environments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".