MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7046373480

Content and thematic analyses of calcium and weight messages in Canadian women's magazines

2005· dissertation· en· W7046373480 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalciumThematic analysisContent analysisFocus groupQualitative researchBody weightOsteoporosis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osteoporosis affects 1.4 million Canadian women over 50 years of age.Maximizing bone mass by age 30 may reduce this risk.Both reduced calcium intake and weight loss are associated with compromised bone mass.Over 50% of Canadian women do not consume recommended amounts of milk and over 600lo of women report dieting.The purpose of this study was to determine the nature of calcium and weight information offered in Canadianmagazines.This focus was chosen because over 70o/o of Canadian women have reportedmagazines as a source of nutrition information.American magazines have been studied, but not Canadian.Therefore, this study used quantitative and qualitative research methods to examine the frequency and content of calcium and weight messages in 24 issues of Flare and Chatelaine, published in 2000 and 2001.beyond the prime age for maximizing bone density, however some of these were ageappropriate because they provided advice for their children.Messages focusing on weight emphasized weight loss through the theme of promoting the thin ideal.Achieving the thin ideal provided strategies to achieve thinness including diets/diet products, food choices, exercise, and changing appearance in some way.Preventing obesity was touched on, while some messages promoted self-acceptance.Generally, Flare's messages concentrated on weight while providing limited calcium information.This inadvertently promotes a lifestyle that may increase risk for osteoporosis.tv DEDICATION I dedicate this work to my children, Liat, Danit, and Eidan, to inspire you.This project exemplifies the notion that anything can be achieved, at any point in life, when goals are set and the desire is within.I also dedicate this thesis to my husband, Ami, whose unrelenting support was so appreciated.On the most stressful of days, when quitting seemed like a simple solution, your encouragement allowed me to continue to pursue my ambition and achieve my goals.ACKNO\ryLEDGMENTS A sincere thank you is extended to the following individuals and organizations.Their

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0130.018
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→