MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417410008 · doi:10.32920/30889820.v2

Flavours of Home: Providing Culturally Inclusive Meals through Meals on Wheels

2025· article· W4417410008 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yukari Seko, James Tiessen, Veen Wong, Eimi Igarashi, R. Adachi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCulturally appropriateCultural diversityCulturally sensitiveCultural competencePopulationQualitative researchFace (sociological concept)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ontario’s Meals on Wheels (MOW) programs play a vital role in supporting seniors’ nutrition, independence, and social well-being. As Ontario becomes more culturally diverse and its senior population grows, understanding whether MOW services meet the cultural and dietary needs of older adults has become increasingly important. This study examined culturally appropriate meal provision through a two-phase mixed-methods approach: qualitative case studies of two culturally specific MOW programs and a province-wide survey with 63 active MOW providers. Study findings show that culturally appropriate meals are widely recognized as essential for seniors’ dignity, comfort, identity, and service engagement. 70% of MOW programs offer at least one cultural meal option. Large programs (500+ clients) are more likely to offer one or more cultural meal options along with Western meals. Most programs rated the importance of cultural meals highly (average 8.8/10), yet many face barriers in delivering them. Most programs believe they are supporting cultural needs reasonably well (average 7.7/10), often because their client base culturally matches with meals they are offering or because they already provide some menu flexibility. However, two-thirds of respondents reported unmet, growing, and anticipated demand for culturally appropriate foods. Across the province, the most common barriers to offering culturally appropriate meals include difficulty securing food suppliers, funding limitations, uncertainty about clients’ cultural preferences, and limited familiarity with diverse cuisines. Programs expressed strong interest in additional support, especially increased funding, access to culturally knowledgeable food providers, partnerships with community organizations, and training on culturally inclusive meal preparation. Overall, the findings highlight both the commitment and the constraints of Ontario’s MOW providers. While programs view culturally appropriate food provision as increasingly important, operational realities, particularly supplier availability, funding, and kitchen capacity, limit their ability to respond fully to Ontario’s evolving demographic landscape. Continued investment, community partnerships, and resource sharing will be essential to ensure that MOW services remain accessible and culturally relevant for all seniors in Ontario.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→