Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Reorienting health services towards health promotion is one of the major health promotion strategies stipulated by the Ottawa Charter). Important contradictions, tensions and barriers to health promotion implementation associated with organisational structures have, thus far, been underexposed in the hospital health promotion discourse. This paper aims at identifying risks and the chances for hospital management to strategically and sustainably reorient their hospitals towards health promotion. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The paper combines theories and findings from organisational science and management studies as well as from capacity development in the form of a narrative literature review. The aim is to focus on the conditions hospitals, as organisational systems with a highly professionalised workforce, provide for a strategically managed reorientation towards health promotion. Models and principles helping managers to navigate the difficulties and complexities of health promotion reorientation will be suggested. FINDINGS: Hospital managers have to deal with genuine obstacles in the complexity and structural formation of hospital organisations. Against this background, continuous management support, a transformative leadership style, participative strategic management and expert governance can be considered important organisational capacities for the reorientation towards a new concept such as health promotion. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: This paper discusses managerial strategies, effective structural transformations and important organisational capacities that can contribute to a sustainable reorientation of hospitals towards health promotion. It supports hospital managers in exploring their chances of facilitating and effectively supporting a sustainable health promotion reorientation of their hospitals. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The paper provides an innovative approach where the focus is on enhanced possibilities for hospital managers to strategically manage the reorientation towards health promotion.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".