ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF A NUTRITION EDUCATION AND SKILLBUILDING INTERVENTION ON DIET QUALITY IN OBESE INDIVIDUALS: A PILOT STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With 1 in 4 Canadians obese, effective dietary approaches for weight loss are needed. Traditionally, restrictive dietary plans are used, but they have proven ineffective in longterm weight loss maintenance; therefore, alternative approaches are warranted. Using the Canadian Healthy Eating Index (CHEI) as a framework, this six-month nutrition education and skill-building pilot intervention was examined for its acceptability and impact at improving the overall diet quality of healthy, obese adults (n=7). Postintervention interviews and surveys were analyzed for program acceptability and to assess key changes in participants’ behaviours and self-efficacy towards diet quality improvement. In addition, changes in CHEI score and body weight were assessed. While no change in body weight was observed, all participants perceived the intervention as beneficial and practical and the CHEI score improved by 9.9 points (p=0.10). This pilot intervention was well-received by participants and may offer an alternative to restrictive diets for weight loss.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".