Hunger, academic performance, and the moderating role of social support in Canadian youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1.7 million young Canadians experience hunger on a regular basis. Youth who experience hunger are more likely to underperform in school which in turn can lead to negative outcomes and trajectories that impact their long-term health, wellbeing, and ability to succeed in adult life. Public health interventions require an evidence base to address this phenomenon. This thesis will therefore provide observational epidemiological data to describe whether social supports, as a potential point of intervention, act as modifiers of relationships between hunger and the relative ability of adolescents to perform well in school. This study consists of two components: firstly, a contemporary descriptive analysis of the distribution of hunger within Canadian youth, and second, an evaluation of the relationship between hunger and academic performance among Canadian youth, and the potential moderating role of social support along this pathway. All analyses were conducted using the 2018 cycle of the Canadian Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study. Results from this study will be important theoretically and also provide foundational evidence in support of integrated efforts to support youth in academic and community settings.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".