MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1806581787 · doi:10.15381/anales.v70i4.929

Percepción de los estudiantes de ciencias de la salud acerca de su formación en promoción de la salud

2012· article· en· W1806581787 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gladys Santos-Falcón, María Infante-Contreras, María Josefa Arcaya Moncada, Carlos Márquez-Cabezas, Maribel Mendoza Gil, Yelin Ramírez

Bibliographic record

VenueAnales de la Facultad de Medicina · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, psychology, and well-being
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth promotionPromotion (chess)PerceptionMedical educationNursingPsychological interventionHealth carePsychologyMedicinePublic healthPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To identify a Peruvian Faculty of Medicine students’ perception on training in health promotion. Design: Quantitative-qualitative study. Institution: Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru. Participants: Faculty of Medicine’s five academic professional schools penultimate year students. Interventions: Two data collection techniques -an interview with a modified Lickert questionnaire and focus group- were applied to 127 students. Main outcome measures: Quantification of the students’ perception on their training on health promotion strategies in relation to Ottawa’s Letter proposition on health promotion. Results: The students’ perception on their health promotion strategies training was moderately favorable, with tendency to be quite favorable in two them: School of Nursing in creating supportive environments for health and strengthening community action, with 70,5% and 59,3% respectively; School of Nutrition students had a completely favorable perception on implementing public policies, in 60,9%. It should be noted that only in one dimension (personal abilities) the students’ perceptions was unfavorable in two schools: Medical School, in 23,4%, and Medical Technology, in 20,4%. With the qualitative data we structured seven analysis categories: 1) appreciating health promotion; 2) linking health promotion with community care; 3) being motivated to promote health; 4) appreciating community strengthening; 5) determining the Faculty should promote health; 6) considering factors that hinder health promotion; and, 7) appreciating interdisciplinary involvement in health promotion. Conclusions: The Faculty of Medicine students had varied perception in relation to health promotion formation, according to strategies proposed by Ottawa’s Letter. It will be necessary to unify and improve training in order to develop interdisciplinary health and confront health complex problems present in our society.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.434 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnales de la Facultad de MedicinaSame topicHealth, psychology, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207