EXAMINING THE SOCIAL EXPERIENCE IN A VIRTUAL CULINARY NUTRITION EDUCATION INTERVENTION: THE COGNITIVE KITCHEN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Evidence suggests preventing or delaying the onset of dementia could have a substantial impact on both direct and indirect costs of health care as well as individual burden. It is estimated around 40% of dementia cases could be prevented through the reduction of modifiable risk factors. Following a nutritious eating pattern is one strategy to reduce the risk of cognitive decline and dementia, but knowledge on how to encourage adoption of dietary patterns shown to support brain health is limited. Being socially active and engaging in cognitively stimulating activities are also recommended dementia risk-reduction behaviours. Cooking classes provide a unique setting where social contact can be integrated with continued education and practical application of nutrition-related dementia risk-reduction strategies (i.e., through food preparation). Interest in studying virtual cooking class delivery has recently increased, with some circumstances making remote attendance appealing (e.g., to reduce travel during inclement weather and illness outbreaks, potentially reduce program costs associated with space rental). Very little published literature captures the feasibility of virtual cooking class delivery in maintaining key program outcomes identified in conventional in-person classes—namely, social interaction. For a dementia risk-reduction-focused virtual intervention in particular, understanding strategies to enhance social engagement is valuable to maximize outcomes for participants. Aim: Examine older adult participants’ experience of the social component of a virtual culinary nutrition education intervention for dementia risk reduction. Methods: The Interpretive Description (ID) methodological approach was used to explore participants’ experiences from two separate but identical offerings of a pilot virtual Cognitive Kitchen program. Data sources for this qualitative study included session observation fieldnotes, end-of-program focus group discussions with each group, participant digital journal entries (45 submissions), and semi-structured individual interviews (n=15, comprised of 13 individual interviews and one shared interview). The two focus groups and 14 interview recordings were transcribed verbatim and analyzed with the other data. Thematic analysis led to the identification of four themes that capture what was learned about the social component of the virtual Cognitive Kitchen from participants’ experiences. Findings: The themes respond to the research objectives of this study by describing the function of social interactions in the program and facilitators and barriers to social engagement in the virtual setting. Social interactions were described to contribute to key program outcomes related to providing culinary and nutrition education and promoting engagement in cooking, as represented by the themes Supporting Learning and Encouraging Application. The theme Trade-offs: Advantages and Missed Connections presents both benefits and drawbacks of the virtual setting that were identified to impact the social component of the program. Lastly, recommendations for future offerings of the Cognitive Kitchen are presented in the theme Ingredients for Engagement. Conclusion: The social component of the virtual Cognitive Kitchen was valued by participants and contributed to the achievement of key program outcomes. Specifically, contributions from group members were described to enhance the educational content on nutrition and socialization-related dementia risk-reduction strategies. Additionally, the group setting provided accountability for many participants to engage in home cooking and social interactions appeared to function to promote cooking as an activity to support well-being. The findings also capture that some social experiences are unable to be replicated via web-based programs. As such, additional effort by facilitators is necessary to enhance social engagement among participants in virtual culinary nutrition education interventions.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".