Healthy Spaces in Meaningful Places
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The influence of place on health is beginning to be addressed in health research. Current understanding of rural places, however, remains in a state of disequilibrium, balancing between geographic and sociocultural positions. This article illuminates the significance of place for rural women's experiences of health promotion in the rural church. DESIGN: This study used a novel approach to interpretive phenomenological methodology by including the photovoice method to elicit both individual and shared experiential meanings. METHOD: Twenty-two participants took pictures, wrote in logbooks, and participated in individual and group interviews to share their experiences of health promotion in the rural church. FINDINGS: The church as a place was realized through three broad discourses: (a) an intersection of physical and geographic environments, (b) a gateway to experiential attachment and personal meaning, and (c) a connection to shared culture and beliefs. It is also suggested that place may best be interpreted with an experiential lens as it exhibits lived and felt spaces. CONCLUSIONS: Data analysis suggests that place consists of both physical and experiential realities, in addition to being a resource of culture and meaning. Implications for rural women's health promotion include fostering a deeper recognition of place-shaped experiences of health.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it