If We Offer It, Will Children Buy It? Sales of Healthy Foods Mirrored Their Availability in a Community Sport, Commercial Setting in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Community sports settings are often sources of unhealthy foods for children. Many managers in these settings are reluctant to increase availability of healthy food options because they perceive that healthy foods are not profitable. This study assessed the independent contribution of increased availability of healthy foods to their sales in a community sport, commercial context. Change in revenues per patron was also examined. METHODS: The availability of healthy items was increased from 9.1% at baseline (35 days) to 25.0% during the intervention period (40 days), returning to 9.1% postintervention (6 days). Purchases of all patrons who bought foods/beverages (n=17,262 items sold) from two concessions at an outdoor community pool were assessed from baseline to postintervention. Chi-square analyses assessed differences in the proportion of healthy and unhealthy items sold, as well as in the proportion of total revenues per patron across periods. A trained observer also recorded qualitative observations pertaining to a subset of patrons' (n=221) dietary behaviors and activities. RESULTS: Healthy items represented 7.7%, 22.7%, and 9.8% of sales during the preintervention, intervention, and postintervention periods, respectively (p<0.01). Sales of healthy beverages exceeded sales of all other product types. The proportion of total revenues per patron did not differ by period. CONCLUSIONS: Food availability was an important environmental determinant of food purchasing behaviors in this community commercial context, given that sales of healthy foods closely mirrored their availability. Increased availability of healthy foods in community and commercial settings is important because concurrent changes within multiple environments will be required to improve children's dietary behaviors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".