MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6958931540 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6743649

Winnipeg-based elementary school teachers’ perspectives on food allergy management: a qualitative analysis

2023· other· en· W6958931540 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Regulatory Analysis
Canadian institutionsGeorge & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare InnovationUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood allergyThematic analysisTheme (computing)FeelingQualitative researchPublic healthSchool teachersContent analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Food allergy affects 7-8% of children worldwide. Teachers supervise children in school, where most children spend their day. Yet, teachers have variable food allergy-related knowledge. Objective We aimed to identify how Winnipeg-based elementary school teachers manage food allergy and prevent food-triggered allergic reactions in their classrooms and schools. Methods Kindergarten-Grade 6 public and private school teachers, from Winnipeg, Canada, were interviewed virtually upon providing written informed consent. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The study followed a pragmatic framework. Data were analysed via thematic analysis by multiple researchers. Results We interviewed 16 teachers, who primarily identified as female (87.5%). Most teachers worked in public schools (87.5%) and, on average, had 5.8 years of teaching experience. We identified four themes within the data. Most teachers (68.9%) had direct or indirect experience with food allergy. Theme 1 described the minimal standardization and inconsistent enforcement of food allergy policies between and within schools. Teachers also had varied food allergy knowledge. Theme 2 reflected teachers’ variable confidence/perceived knowledge towards food allergy management, including feeling of stress and anxiety. Theme 3 captured the lack of standardized food allergy education for teachers, and concerns about the adequacy of the current provincial program. Theme 4 described how teachers spoke of relying on other school staff, families and students to have effective communication. Conclusion Teachers’ food allergy management was informed by their knowledge and lived experience, guided by their school policies and individualized students’ needs. Teachers identified gaps in knowledge and communication, and desired more training and resources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6110.006

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.306 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicLegal and Regulatory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207